switch_update_set

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

The description adds no behavioral detail beyond what the annotations already convey. It does not mention side effects, return values, or any prerequisites. Since the annotations already indicate this is not read-only, not destructive, and idempotent, the description provides no additional transparency.

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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any filler or repetitive content. It is appropriately sized for the simple action it describes.

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 one parameter and annotations present, the description adequately states the action. It is a lightweight context-switching operation, so the minimal description is sufficient, though it omits any mention of error behavior or effects on the environment beyond the obvious.

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 schema fully documents the only parameter (sys_id) with its description. The tool description adds no extra meaning or context around the parameter, so it does not exceed the schema's 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 uses a specific verb ('Switch') and clearly identifies the resource ('active Update Set context') and action ('to a specified Update Set'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like get_current_update_set and ensure_active_update_set by stating the precise operation.

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 its usage through the action described, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ensure_active_update_set or list_update_sets. No exclusions or when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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