pm_toggle_buyers

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. 'Toggle' implies a state change, but the description does not clarify whether it adds/removes buyers, requires specific permissions, or has side effects. The agent is left to infer the mutation behavior from the parameter names alone.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence. While it avoids verbosity, it sacrifices necessary information. There is no structure (e.g., bullets or sections) to aid comprehension, but the length is appropriate for the simplicity of the action if parameters were explained elsewhere.

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 has three required parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and many related sibling tools, the description is deeply insufficient. It fails to explain return values, side effects, prerequisites (e.g., market must be private), or how it relates to pm_manage_whitelist. The agent cannot confidently use this tool without additional context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameter meanings. It does not define 'market,' 'buyers,' or 'status.' The agent cannot infer that 'market' is an identifier, 'buyers' are addresses, or that 'status' toggles access on/off. 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 'Toggle private event buyer access' clearly states the verb 'toggle' and the resource 'private event buyer access.' It gives a general sense of the tool's function, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like pm_manage_whitelist or pm_manage_voter, which might handle similar access 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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or context. The agent receives no guidance on appropriate invocation scenarios.

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