Enable/disable filter

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It states the core state change (enable/disable) but omits details such as idempotency, error handling if the filter or source doesn't exist, and return value behavior. The basic action is transparent, but additional behavioral context is missing.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the simplicity of the tool and contains zero wasted words.

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 toggle operation with an output schema present, the description provides the essential action but lacks usage context, alternative tool references, and edge-case behavior. It is minimally complete but leaves gaps in when and how to use it within the broader toolset.

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%, and the description adds no explanation of what each parameter means beyond the parameter names themselves. It does not clarify the role of 'enabled' beyond the obvious (true/false), nor does it describe expected values for source_name or filter_name. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 ('Enable or disable') and the resource ('a filter on a source'). It is specific enough to distinguish from general filter management tools, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from set_filter_settings which might also handle enabled 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 provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like set_filter_settings or add_filter/remove_filter. The description is a one-liner with no context, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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