Activate a prompt book by ID to designate it as the active collection for prompt retrieval and management.
Set a prompt book as active
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ID of the prompt book to activate |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.5Does 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 only says the prompt book will be 'set as active' but does not explain side effects, whether activation is exclusive, whether it is idempotent, or how it affects other prompt books. For a state-changing tool, this is a significant gap.
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 direct sentence with no filler or unnecessary wording. The action and object are immediately visible, making it easy to parse quickly.
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 one-parameter tool, the minimal description is workable, but it lacks behavioral context and a definition of what 'active' means or what effect activation has. There is no output schema, so a brief note about expected results or side effects would improve completeness.
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 already fully describes the only parameter, 'id', with 100% schema description coverage. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 specific action ('Set') on a clear resource ('a prompt book') with a target state ('as active'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that create, rename, remove, or list prompt books. However, it leaves the meaning of 'active' somewhat undefined and uses 'prompt book' while siblings refer to 'prompt_book_config', introducing slight ambiguity.
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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_prompt_book_config, rename_prompt_book, or list_prompt_books. The agent must infer the appropriate context from the tool name and description alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.