set_flow_control_line

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the toggle action but does not mention side effects, reversibility, prerequisites, or impact on traffic. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single clear sentence with no redundancy or waste. It is appropriately front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 tool's simplicity, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'smart flow control' does, which interface to use, or what happens upon enabling/disabling. The presence of an output schema mitigates return-value concerns, but the description still lacks critical context for a mutation 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters. The description mentions '某条线路' but does not map it to the 'interface' parameter or clarify possible values. The 'enabled' boolean is self-evident, but the interface parameter remains ambiguous.

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 '启用/禁用某条线路的智能流控' clearly states the action (enable/disable) and the resource (smart flow control for a specific line). This distinguishes it from sibling getter tools like get_flow_control_lines and other setter tools.

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 implies when to use it (when you want to enable or disable smart flow control on a line) but does not explicitly state alternatives or when-not-to-use. No exclusions are mentioned, so it provides clear context but lacks direct guidance on alternative tools.

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