set_active_identity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it indicates this is a mutation operation ('Set'), it doesn't explain what 'active identity' means functionally, whether the change is temporary or permanent (though the 'persist' parameter hints at this), what permissions are required, or what happens if an invalid identity_id is provided. Significant 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, efficient sentence that states the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with two parameters and gets straight to the point with zero wasted text.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage for two parameters, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what constitutes a valid identity, the effect of the persist parameter, error conditions, or what happens after setting the identity. The agent would have significant gaps in understanding how to use this tool correctly.

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 undocumented parameters. The description mentions 'active identity' which relates to the 'identity_id' parameter, but doesn't explain what an identity is, where to get valid IDs, or what format they use. It completely ignores the 'persist' parameter and its implications. The description adds minimal value beyond the parameter names.

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 ('Set') and the target resource ('active identity for Amazon Ads API calls'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'set_active_profile', which appears to serve a similar function for profiles rather than identities.

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 like 'set_active_profile' or 'get_active_identity', nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing to first list available identities. It simply states what the tool does without context about appropriate usage scenarios.

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