lc_preview_set_external_adapter_enabled

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'preview toggling' but does not confirm that no modifications occur (i.e., it's a safe read-only operation). It also lacks information about required permissions, side effects, or response format, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's impact.

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 extremely concise at one sentence, but it sacrifices necessary details. While brevity is good, the lack of structure (e.g., separate sections for behavior, parameters, output) makes it hard for an agent to parse quickly. It would benefit from additional context without becoming verbose.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to mention that this is a dry-run operation, what the output represents, or the meaning of each parameter. The agent has insufficient information to correctly select and invoke this 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage on parameter names but 0% descriptions. The tool description adds no explanation for 'oid', 'name', 'enabled', or 'token_ttl_seconds'. For example, it's unclear whether 'oid' refers to the Hive record OID or the external adapter OID. This forces the agent to rely on schema names alone, which are insufficient.

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 is for previewing a toggle of the enabled metadata of an external adapter Hive record. It uses a specific verb 'preview toggling' and identifies the resource 'external adapter Hive record's enabled metadata', distinguishing it from other preview tools for different resources.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is a dry-run operation (no changes are made), nor does it explain prerequisites like the existence of the external adapter. This is a critical gap for a preview tool.

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