set_mate_suppression

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses behavioral traits such as the live note about component suppression not flipping mates' suppressed flags in this version, and advises a snapshot-diff workflow. It also notes the return value includes metadata. This adds valuable context beyond the schema.

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 somewhat long due to bilingual content, but the English portion is clear and front-loaded with purpose and use cases. The workflow is detailed but justified. A minor redundancy between languages prevents a perfect score.

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?

Despite simple parameters, the description addresses complexity with version-dependent behavior and provides a concrete workflow. It mentions returning metadata (no output schema needed). The description is complete for safe and correct tool usage.

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 explains both parameters: mate_name is an SW-assigned name from get_active_assembly_info (with example), and suppressed is True to suppress, False to resume. This adds complete meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 suppresses or resumes a mate by name, with specific verb+resource. It further distinguishes from siblings by providing use cases like parking a wrong-branch mate before recreating and post-component-suppression cleanup, which contrasts with component suppression tools.

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 explicitly provides when to use the tool, including concrete scenarios: 'desactivar un mate de rama incorrecta antes de recrearlo con place_and_mate' and 'limpiar tras supresión de componentes'. Additionally, it includes a detailed workflow for cascade-aware resume, guiding the agent on proper usage sequence.

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