Turn Widget Pinning on or off

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations, notably that enabling pinning changes the embed code and creates a snapshot. It also implies the effect of the enabled parameter, though it does not explicitly describe the behavior of disabling pinning. The destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations are consistent with the description.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences with no unnecessary fluff. It front-loads the core action (freezing the widget) and provides relevant details (snapshot, embed code change, plan requirement) efficiently.

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 and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: the action, the side effect on embed code, and the Enterprise plan requirement. It does not explicitly address the behavior of disabling pinning, but it is reasonably inferable from the title and the enabled parameter description.

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% for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description enhances understanding of the enabled parameter by explaining that turning it on builds a snapshot and changes the embed code, adding value beyond the schema's simple 'True to pin the widget.'

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 tool's purpose: freezing the chat widget at its current version and building a snapshot, which is equivalent to enabling or disabling pinning. It distinguishes this from general widget settings updates by focusing on the pinning behavior.

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 Enterprise plan requirement, which is a precondition, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_widget_settings. No guidance on comparison with sibling tools is provided.

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