charlotte_tools

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It explains that disabled tools don't appear and that enabling groups is needed to use their tools. It also defines the scope of each group. It could mention persistence or side effects, but for a visibility toggle this is sufficient.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized. The first sentence states the purpose, the second explains behavior, and the rest enumerates groups efficiently. Every sentence provides useful information with no 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 tool with two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description thoroughly covers purpose, behavior, and parameter semantics. It gives enough context for an agent to select the right group and action.

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 coverage is 100% with enums, so the baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by describing what each group contains (e.g., 'interaction' for form filling/clicking) and clarifying the default 'list' action, which goes beyond the generic schema descriptions.

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 verb+resource: 'Manage Charlotte tool visibility' and immediately explains the list/enable/disable actions. It is easy to distinguish from sibling tools, which perform specific browser actions like clicking or navigating.

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 explains when to use the tool: to list groups/status and to enable or disable groups. It also clarifies the consequence (disabled tools don't appear) and that enabling is required to access tools. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear.

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