toggle_oncall_policy

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

No annotations are provided, yet the description only says 'Toggle (enable/disable)' without explaining whether it flips the current state or sets a specific value. It does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or the result of toggling.

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?

Single sentence, no redundant words. However, it could be structured to include more useful details without increasing length significantly.

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?

No output schema; description does not mention return value. For a mutation tool with three parameters including a nested object, the description lacks completeness regarding behavior and expected inputs beyond naming.

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 describes all three parameters (monitorId, policyId, body) and coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the action (toggle) and resource (on-call policy assigned to a monitor). It distinguishes from sibling tools like assign_oncall_policy and unassign_oncall_policy by implying a state change rather than assignment or removal.

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?

Indirectly implies usage for enabling/disabling a policy, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives (e.g., assign_oncall_policy for initial assignment, toggle for state changes). No exclusions or context provided.

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