asc_enable_capability

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates that this is a mutating operation that changes the app's entitlements, and it directs the user to run signing_quick_setup afterwards to regenerate profiles. This adds useful behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 concise, front-loads the action and examples, and ends with a crucial follow-up instruction. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

The description is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and prerequisites, but it lacks details on return values or error handling, which could be important for a state-changing operation. However, without an output schema, the description's coverage is adequate.

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 0%, but the description provides examples for the 'capability' parameter (e.g., PUSH_NOTIFICATIONS, ASSOCIATED_DOMAINS) and indicates that 'identifier' is the bundle id. This compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 action ('Enable a capability') and the target resource ('bundle id'), with examples of capabilities. It distinguishes from siblings like signing_quick_setup by noting the need to recreate profiles, but doesn't explicitly name which sibling to use for that follow-up.

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 explains when to use this tool (to enable a capability on a bundle id) and includes a post-requisite (recreate profiles with signing_quick_setup). However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives for related operations.

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