activate_configuration

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

Discloses that activation triggers a rebuild, applies suppressions and dimension values, and returns the previous configuration name. No annotations exist, so the description fully carries the burden.

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?

Concise bilingual description with front-loaded main action, then details, use case, and parameter doc. Every sentence 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?

Fully covers the tool's behavior, return value, and use case. No output schema, but description explains return. Complete for a simple tool.

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?

Describes the single parameter 'name' as 'Name of the configuration to activate', adding meaning beyond the schema's type string. Schema coverage is 0% but the description compensates.

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 the verb "activate" and resource "configuration" clearly, and distinguishes from siblings like create_configuration or delete_configuration by specifying the action of switching and the rebuild trigger.

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?

Explicitly mentions the use case: verify a variant built with build_variant_family before saving. Provides context but does not list conditions when not to use or alternatives other than build_variant_family.

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