toggle_web_auth

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

No annotations are provided, yet the description only says 'enable/disable' without disclosing potential side effects (e.g., locking out users, requiring admin privileges, or persistence across reboots). For a toggle that changes security posture, this is insufficient transparency.

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, compact phrase with no filler. It is immediately understandable and front-loaded with the verb-action and target 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?

The tool is simple, and an output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, the description omits any caution about the impact of disabling web authentication, which is relevant for a toggle tool. It is minimally complete but lacks safety context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by making the boolean parameter self-explanatory: 'enabled' corresponds to enabling or disabling web authentication. No ambiguity remains for a one-parameter tool.

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/disable) and the resource (web authentication). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_web_auth_config (read-only) and toggle_vpn_server (different feature).

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 phrase '启用/禁用' implies a binary switch action but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus running get_web_auth_config first or versus similar toggle tools. Usage context is only implied by the name and sibling list.

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