hosts_bulk_disable

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says hosts are disabled but does not disclose reversibility, whether the change takes effect immediately, partial-failure behavior, or permission requirements. 'Bulk disable' describes the action but not its side effects.

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 one short sentence with no filler or repetition, and the key action is front-loaded. It is appropriately compact for a simple one-parameter tool, though the brevity borders on under-specification in other dimensions.

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-parameter mutation with complete schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate to invoke: pass uuids of hosts to disable. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it lacks information about return values, reversibility, and operational effects, leaving clear gaps that prevent a higher score.

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 100%; the only parameter, 'uuids', is already described as 'Array of host UUIDs'. The description's phrase 'selected hosts' is a light paraphrase of uuids and adds no new semantics like format, constraints, or edge cases. With the schema doing the heavy lifting, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clear verb ('disable') and resource ('hosts'), and 'bulk' signals it operates on multiple selected records rather than a single host. It is distinguishable from sibling hosts_bulk_enable and hosts_bulk_delete by the operation word, though it does not explicitly call them out. Some detail about what 'disable' actually changes is omitted, so 4 rather than 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this over hosts_bulk_enable, hosts_bulk_delete, hosts_bulk_update, or hosts_update. The only signal is the verb and 'bulk', which implies use for multi-host disable but gives no exclusions, alternatives, or prerequisites. This is effectively no guidance beyond the operation name.

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