gh_set_toggle

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, indicating a write operation, and the description's 'Set' aligns with this. However, beyond stating the action, the description does not disclose additional behavioral traits (e.g., whether it modifies the document, what happens if the component does not exist, or undo capabilities). The annotations already provide the core safety profile, so the description adds limited value.

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 consists of a single, clear sentence with no extraneous information. It is optimally concise for the purpose stated.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description lacks crucial context. It does not explain how to identify the toggle, what the value parameter accepts, or any behavioral nuances. For a tool with two required parameters and no schema descriptions, this is insufficient.

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%, placing the burden on the description to explain parameters. The description fails to mention either required parameter (component_id and value), leaving the agent to infer meaning from names alone. This is a significant gap.

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 'Set a Boolean Toggle component to true or false' uses a specific verb ('Set') and clearly identifies the resource ('Boolean Toggle component') and the action (setting to true or false). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like gh_set_slider and gh_set_parameter, which target different component types.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gh_set_slider or gh_set_parameter. It lacks explicit context for usage scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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