rtpengine_enable

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavior. It only says 'enable or disable' without explaining side effects (e.g., impact on active sessions), permission requirements, or confirmation of state change.

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 concise with a front-loaded action line followed by parameter details. Minor formatting could improve readability, but it's efficient.

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 tool, the description covers the basics but lacks details on error conditions (e.g., invalid URL) or post-state. With an output schema, return values don't need explanation, but more context on behavior would be beneficial.

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 description adds significant value beyond the schema by providing an example URL and clarifying the boolean 'enabled' parameter. Schema coverage is 0%, so this description compensates well.

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 tool enables or disables an RTPEngine instance, with a specific verb (enable/disable) and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like rtpengine_reload, rtpengine_sessions, etc., which perform different actions.

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 implies usage when toggling enablement but does not explicitly state when to use over alternatives like rtpengine_reload or rtpengine_show. No guidance on preconditions or consequences.

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