toggle_custom_pixel

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action (enable/disable) but does not reveal any side effects, prerequisites (e.g., pixel must exist), permission requirements, or reversibility. This is a mutation operation with minimal transparency, similar to the calibration example for 'update_drive'.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that says exactly what the tool does with no wasted words. It effectively communicates the core purpose without verbosity.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides the essential purpose but lacks any contextual details about prerequisites, return values, or error conditions. It is minimally viable but leaves gaps for an agent to fully understand the behavior.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters, each with clear descriptions (Custom Pixel ID, whether to enable or disable). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 a specific action ('Enable or disable') applied to a specific resource ('a custom pixel'). This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_custom_pixel, update_custom_pixel, and delete_custom_pixel, and aligns with the tool name 'toggle_custom_pixel'.

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 context is clear that this tool changes the enabled state of a custom pixel, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives such as update_custom_pixel. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions are provided, leaving usage largely implied.

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