set_blackbox_disable_attitude

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behaviors. It only states that attitude data is excluded from logs, but omits details like whether the change applies immediately, persists across reboots, or affects existing logs. The type hint (UINT32, default OFF) is partially redundant with the schema's enum.

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 very concise, fitting in a single line with a clear structure: name, colon, action. It front-loads the tool name and immediately explains the effect. No unnecessary words.

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 configuration setter with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks details on behavioral implications (e.g., persistence, immediate effect). Given the presence of many similar sibling tools, slightly more context would be beneficial.

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% and the description adds the default value (OFF) which is helpful but not critical. The parameter's meaning is adequately conveyed by the schema and name. No deeper semantics are added.

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: to exclude attitude data from logs. The resource (blackbox_disable_attitude) and verb (set) are explicit. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other set_blackbox_disable_* tools, the name and content make the intended setting obvious.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other blackbox_disable settings or alternatives. The description merely explains the function without context on selection criteria or prerequisites.

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