ms_use_cabinet

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true. The description adds meaningful context by clarifying that it changes the active cabinet and that this affects subsequent calls, which the annotations don't convey. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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 and well-structured. The main action is front-loaded in the first sentence, the effect is stated in the second, and the parameter is explained in a single line. There is no filler or 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 tool with one required parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, effect, and parameter semantics. It also points to ms_list_cabinets for valid values. Minor gaps like error handling are not critical for this simple operation, so the description is sufficiently complete.

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 has no description for the 'name' parameter (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining it is 'the cabinet to activate' and referencing ms_list_cabinets for valid names. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare property title 'Name' in the schema.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Switch the active cabinet.' It also explains the effect ('Subsequent API calls use its credentials'), which makes it distinct from tools like ms_list_cabinets or ms_add_cabinet. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 when to use it: before making other API calls that depend on the active cabinet's credentials. It even directs the user to ms_list_cabinets for valid names, providing helpful context. However, it doesn't explicitly state exclusions or name alternatives like ms_add_cabinet, though that's not critical for this simple switch operation.

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