toggle_script

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive mutation. The description adds a behavioral consequence beyond the schema: disabled scripts are not injected into matching pages. This gives agents useful context about the real effect of disabling.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the action, the behavioral effect, and the intended use case. No filler or repetition.

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 simple toggle tool with two required parameters and annotations covering mutability, idempotence, and destructiveness, the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 both parameters are clearly described in the schema itself. The description adds no new parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb pair (enable/disable) with a clear resource (userscript), and distinguishes itself from deletion by explicitly noting this does not delete the script. This is enough to separate it from delete_script and list_scripts.

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?

It explicitly states the intended use case: temporarily turning off a script without deleting it. It does not enumerate alternatives or explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but the contrast with deletion makes the primary usage context clear.

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