Switch to a specific Diadoc cabinet to set credentials for subsequent API calls. Use this to change which organization's documents and operations you access.
Switch the active cabinet. Subsequent API calls use its credentials.
Args: name: the cabinet to activate (see diadoc_list_cabinets).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses the important stateful behavior: subsequent API calls use the switched cabinet's credentials. This adds meaningful context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true) and helps the agent understand the tool's side effects.
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 two concise sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, the consequence is stated immediately, and the parameter explanation is compact and useful.
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, has one parameter, and an output schema is present, so the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the core behavior and parameter source well, though it could optionally mention what happens when an invalid name is provided.
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?
The schema provides no description for the 'name' parameter, so the description compensates by explaining that name is 'the cabinet to activate' and pointing to diadoc_list_cabinets for valid values. This is sufficient for a single simple parameter.
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: 'Switch the active cabinet.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like diadoc_add_cabinet, diadoc_remove_cabinet, and diadoc_list_cabinets by focusing on activation rather than management or enumeration.
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 provides clear usage context: this tool changes which cabinet's credentials subsequent API calls use, and it references diadoc_list_cabinets as the source for valid names. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but the intended workflow is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.