timeline_set_suppressed

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well. It discloses atomic rollback behavior, the failure condition when a feature enters an error state, details.reverted=true, the allow_errors override, and the return shape.

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 long but front-loads the purpose and atomicity rules before moving into example and item-format details. Given the lack of an output schema and the complexity of item references, most of the length is justified, though the item field listing is verbose.

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 complete for a 3-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. It covers semantics, rollback, error handling, return values, item structure, and an example, giving an agent enough information to call the tool 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 67%, and the description adds useful context beyond the schema by explaining item refs and showing an example call. It clarifies the danger of unsuppressing features whose references are gone, and it explains allow_errors behavior, though suppressed itself is mostly covered by the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: suppress or unsuppress timeline items. It also explains the effect directly by noting that suppressed features are skipped during computation but remain in the timeline, which distinguishes this operation from deletion.

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 makes the usage context clear: use this to suppress or restore timeline items without removing them. It also describes the all-or-nothing behavior and the allow_errors escape hatch, but it does not explicitly contrast the tool with alternatives such as timeline_delete or timeline_roll_to.

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