disable_app

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

Annotations already mark destructive and idempotent hints, but the description adds valuable behavioral details: admin requirement, data preservation, re-enable ability, and the risk of breaking core apps. This goes beyond the annotations and gives the agent crucial safety context.

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 tightly written: main action first, then prerequisite, effect, preservation, and a caution. Every sentence adds value, and the Args/Returns sections are clearly formatted. No fluff.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: purpose, prerequisite, effect, data preservation, risk, parameter semantics, and return type. Nothing critical is missing.

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 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining app_id as 'The app identifier to disable' and providing a concrete example ('weather_status'). This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare 'App Id' label.

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 verb and resource: 'Disable a Nextcloud app.' It clearly differentiates from enable_app by explicitly saying it deactivates the app. The purpose is unambiguous and immediately understood.

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?

It notes the admin privilege requirement and warns against disabling core apps, which are useful usage conditions. However, it doesn't explicitly reference the sibling enable_app or provide when-not-to-use guidance beyond the core-app caution. The context is clear but excludes explicit alternatives.

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