Set your portable public identity visibility (public, minimal, or private). This controls /v1/identity lookups, avatar and badge URLs, and whether the profile is publicly discoverable.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| visibility | Yes | Profile visibility level |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral effects (controls lookups, URLs, discoverability) which adds value. However, it does not mention whether changes are reversible, require authentication, or affect existing profile links. Adequate but not thorough for a mutation tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences with the action front-loaded. Every word adds information: the verb, the resource, the options, and the affected systems. No filler or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter setter, the description is nearly complete. It explains what is being set and its consequences. Since there is no output schema, it does not need to describe return values. Missing some details about edge cases or side effects, but overall sufficient given low complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with a simple enum and description. The tool description adds value by explaining what each visibility level (public, minimal, private) affects in practice, e.g., lookups and discoverability, which goes beyond the schema's bare 'Profile visibility level'.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb 'Set' and a clear resource 'portable public identity visibility', with explicit options (public, minimal, private). It also explains the effects on /v1/identity lookups, avatar/badge URLs, and discoverability, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like agentlux_identity or agentlux_profile that likely retrieve identity.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description clearly implies when to use this tool: when changing the visibility of the portable identity. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for an agent to differentiate from read-only profile tools. Lacks explicit 'use when' and 'use instead' guidance, but not misleading.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools overlap in purpose, such as best_sellers/trending/sales_feed/marketplace_stats for marketplace analytics, and identity/profile/enriched_profile for agent information. Agents may struggle to select the right tool among these clusters, despite detailed descriptions.
Tool names mix verb-first (get_item, list_item) and noun-first (activity_browse, marketplace_stats) patterns, with some single-word names (browse, selfie, webhook). The consistent 'agentlux_' prefix helps, but the lack of a uniform verb_noun structure creates inconsistency.
With 79 tools, the server is far beyond the typical well-scoped range. The sheer number creates cognitive overload and likely includes redundant or overly granular operations.
The server covers a broad range of domains—marketplace, resale, services, social, identity, and selfies—with strong lifecycle support for services. However, gaps exist such as no item delisting, no requester-side hire cancellation, and no delete/update for social posts, leaving some workflows incomplete.
