set_interface_enabled

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates that the tool requires write permission and performs an enable/disable action. However, it does not describe error handling or the impact of changing the state.

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 very concise: one sentence for purpose, one for requirement, then parameter details. It front-loads the key action and requirement, making it easy to scan.

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 2-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, and parameter semantics adequately. No additional context is necessary for effective invocation.

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 substantial meaning to the parameters: interface_id can be an internal id (e.g., '*1') or interface name, and enabled is explicitly mapped to True/False for enable/disable. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Aktif/nonaktifkan sebuah interface' (enable/disable an interface), which is a specific verb-resource pair that distinctly identifies the tool's purpose among siblings like set_firewall_rule_enabled.

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 mentions the prerequisite 'BUTUH MIKROCLAW_ALLOW_WRITE=true' but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. Usage is implied by the tool name.

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