panelica_ftp_post_v1_ftp_accounts_id_suspend

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description is not contradicting them. It adds useful context by stating 'Required scopes: ftp:write' and 'Mutating: changes server state.' It does not detail what suspension does to active sessions, but with annotations present, the added auth/state information is meaningful.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core purpose appears first, followed only by essential metadata. Every line earns its place without redundancy.

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 mutation requiring only an id, the description provides the endpoint, category, required scope, and state-change behavior. It lacks explicit guidance about the optional body parameter and reversibility via unsuspend, but those are partially inferable from the schema and sibling tool names.

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%, so the baseline is 3; both id and body have descriptions in the schema. However, id is only described as 'Path parameter: id' and body is declared as an opaque request body with no static schema, and the description adds no further parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific action: 'Suspend FTP account', reinforced by the explicit HTTP POST endpoint and Category FTP. The verb/resource pair clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like unsuspend and change_password.

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?

Usage is implied through 'Suspend FTP account' and the endpoint, but the description does not explicitly say when to choose this over the sibling unsuspend tool, nor does it provide alternative routing. It does provide a prerequisite: required scope ftp:write.

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