set_collection_visibility

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the useful scope 'in viewport,' which indicates this is viewport-only and not render visibility, but it omits behavior such as the effect on child objects, whether the change persists, or what happens if collection_name does not exist. The word 'toggle' also conflicts with the schema's default of visible=true, since omitting visible always shows the collection rather than toggling it.

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 compact and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a clear Args list. Every line is relevant and there is no filler, though the brevity comes at the cost of important behavioral details.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not clarify the default-true behavior, how this differs from set_object_visibility, or the consequences of hiding a collection. An agent would need to infer too much about the expected invocation and side effects.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the schema's lack of explanation. 'collection_name: Collection name' is essentially tautological, and 'visible: Show or hide' adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name and type. It does not explain the default behavior of visible or its relationship to the misleading 'toggle' wording.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Toggle collection visibility in viewport.' This clearly identifies the tool as operating on collections, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_object_visibility. The word 'toggle' is somewhat imprecise because the tool sets visibility to a given boolean rather than flipping the current state.

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 set_object_visibility or batch_visibility. The description implies 'use this to show or hide a collection in the viewport,' but it does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or when a different sibling tool would be more appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.