mock_set_enabled

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the side effect of disabling ('every request goes to real servers') and states that mock files are not deleted ('mock files stay on disk'). This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 zero filler. The main action is front-loaded, and the clarifying consequence is placed immediately after, making the description easy to scan and act on.

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 single-boolean setter with no annotations and a trivial output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and the parameter meaning. It could slightly improve by explicitly routing to mock_rule_set_enabled for per-rule toggling, but the 'whole tool' phrasing makes that distinction reasonably clear.

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?

The schema only provides a boolean 'enabled' with 0% description coverage, so the description must clarify the parameter. It does so by mapping enabled on/off to real behavior: off means bypassing mocks and keeping files. The mapping is clear despite not explicitly saying 'true means enabled.'

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 action ('Turn ... on or off') and a specific resource ('the whole Charles Map Local tool'), and the phrase 'whole' clearly distinguishes it from per-rule tools like mock_rule_set_enabled. An agent immediately knows what this tool controls.

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 gives clear context for when to use it: to toggle the entire Map Local tool, with the concrete consequence that off sends all requests to real servers while mock files remain on disk. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the global scope is evident from the wording.

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