manage_tools

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint: true, readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false. The description adds that the tool controls tool availability and changes profiles/tool states. It does not elaborate on side effects (e.g., persistence, immediate effect) but the annotations already cover the main behavioral traits.

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 two sentences plus a status line, every sentence provides essential information. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Control' and actions, making it efficient and easy to scan.

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 tool manages tool availability, the description covers the actions and provides a sense of current state ('Active profile: full'). It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand its function and usage, though it could mention that changes affect subsequent tool invocations.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all parameters. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond listing actions and mentioning profile names, which is already in the schema.

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 'Control which tools are available' and lists all actions (list_profiles, switch_profile, get_tool_status, toggle_tool, toggle_category). It differentiates from sibling tools, which are all about data/schema operations, by focusing on tool management.

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 explicitly says 'Use this to switch between read-only, safe-write, full, or custom profiles, or enable/disable individual tools.' It provides clear context for when to use, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (but no alternatives exist on this server).

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