Set AI option status

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

Annotations already convey readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, covering the core safety profile. The description adds that the target is the Hostinger Tools plugin and explains where to get the software identifier, but it does not add details about side effects, reversibility, or response behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences with the primary action front-loaded. The second sentence provides only the needed lookup guidance without filler.

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 four-required-parameter toggle with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states what is changed, on what target, and how to resolve a key parameter. It could have referenced the status-checking sibling for verifying current state, but that is not essential for invoking this 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that the software identifier can be obtained from a specific listing endpoint, and it clarifies the option applies to the Hostinger Tools plugin. Username remains weakly documented, but the schema at least names it.

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 or disable an AI option' for the Hostinger Tools plugin on a specific WordPress installation. The resource and scope are specific, and the action explicitly differentiates it from the sibling hosting_showAIOptionStatusV1.

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 provides clear operational context by telling the caller how to obtain the WordPress installation identifier via a specific GET endpoint and that it belongs in the path. It does not explicitly name alternatives or give when-not-to-use conditions, but the context is clear enough for selecting this tool.

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