config.go_live

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: real orders, real money, pro feature, and confirmation requirement (via schema). However, it does not address reversibility (can you switch back?) or failure behaviors, leaving some gaps.

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 three sentences long, no fluff, front-loaded with purpose and critical context. 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, prerequisites, and consequences. Lacking only optional details like reversibility or error handling, which are minor for this basic toggle.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the description does not add new semantic meaning beyond the schema's own description of the 'confirm' parameter. The description essentially repeats the schema's documentation, so no extra value.

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 switches from preview to live trading mode, using a specific verb ('switch') and resource ('mode'). It distinguishes itself from sibling config tools (e.g., config.set, config.dashboard) by focusing specifically on the go-live transition.

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 mentions prerequisites (API credentials configured in environment) and implications (uses real money, pro feature), which helps the agent decide when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives (e.g., staying in preview mode) or scenarios where it should not be used.

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