cigchat_enable_toolset

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait: the change is session-scoped ('for the rest of this session') and takes effect immediately. It does not discuss edge cases like idempotency or errors, but the core side effect is clearly stated.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by a practical usage hint. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what the tool does, its scope, and when to use it. It doesn't describe the return value, but for a side-effect-oriented enable operation this is a minor gap.

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 100% and the schema already describes the toolset parameter as 'Toolset id, as returned by cigchat_list_toolsets.' The description reinforces this by saying to use it after listing, but adds no new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Switch a toolset on for the rest of this session, making its tools available immediately.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools by tying it to the companion list tool and the action of enabling.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use after cigchat_list_toolsets shows the one you need is disabled.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke the tool and names the prerequisite sibling tool, which is strong contextual guidance.

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