engine_maxion_activateActivates Maxion V16 and returns live host telemetry: CPU brand, core count, current load, memory usage, and CPU package temperature (where the OS exposes a sensor).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| duration_minutes | Yes | How long to keep the engine active, in minutes. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | No | Telemetry output and activation state. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate this is a mutating, non-idempotent operation. The description adds useful context by specifying the live telemetry returned and the OS sensor caveat, but it does not disclose side effects, activation lifecycle behavior, or whether the engine remains active after the duration ends.
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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the core action and lists key return data. Every element earns its place with no redundancy or filler.
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?
Given the simple one-parameter schema, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It clearly conveys the action and return surface, though it could be stronger on when to use it relative to sibling tools.
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% because duration_minutes is clearly described as 'How long to keep the engine active, in minutes.' The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 clearly states the action ('Activates Maxion V16') and the resource, and distinguishes it from siblings like engine_maxion_deactivate and engine_maxion_status by emphasizing both activation and the specific telemetry returned. The verb is specific and the scope is concrete.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as engine_maxion_status or engine_maxion_diagnostics. The description does not state prerequisites, when activation is appropriate, or when another sibling tool should be preferred.
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.
Each tool has a distinct name and purpose within its domain (billing, engine, media, security, storage, gateway). While there is some semantic overlap (e.g., engine_maxion_status vs. engine_maxion_diagnostics), the specific functions are clear enough to avoid misselection.
Naming patterns are inconsistent: some tools use domain_entity_action (engine_maxion_activate), others use domain_action (billing_activate), and one uses just domain_status (gateway_status). The inclusion of 'lineage0' and '0' suffixes adds further irregularity.
19 tools is on the higher end but justifiable for a multi-service gateway. However, several tools are stubs (NOT IMPLEMENTED), and there are multiple status/diagnostic tools per domain, which makes the set feel padded rather than tightly scoped.
The tool surface is incomplete in several areas: security lacks functional quarantine and logging, engine lacks a working deactivate, and there is no way to manage billing subscriptions or view media history beyond a simple archive list. The presence of explicitly NOT IMPLEMENTED tools highlights these gaps.