enable_app

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

Annotations already communicate readOnly=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructive=false. The description adds meaningful context beyond those annotations by disclosing the admin privilege requirement and the user-visible effect of activating the app's features.

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 well-structured: a brief purpose sentence, a privilege note, a short behavioral explanation, and an organized Args/Returns section. It is slightly more verbose than strictly necessary for a one-parameter tool, but every section adds value.

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, single-parameter administrative action, the description covers what the tool does, prerequisites, parameter semantics, and return behavior. The presence of an output schema means return details need not be extensive, and 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 compensates fully for the single parameter: it defines app_id as 'the app identifier' and provides concrete examples like 'spreed' and 'mail.' This is exactly the semantic detail the schema lacks.

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, 'Enable a Nextcloud app,' and clarifies the effect by saying it activates a previously disabled or newly installed app. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like disable_app and list_apps.

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 gives useful context: 'Requires admin privileges' and identifies the target state as 'a previously disabled or newly installed app.' However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with alternatives such as disable_app or get_app_info, so usage guidance is more implied than explicit.

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