opnsense_nat_source_toggle

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

With no annotations, the description flags the tool as destructive and requiring confirmation, which is helpful. However, it doesn't mention that changes may need to be applied via opnsense_nat_apply, nor the exact behavior of toggling (e.g., what the enabled state changes to).

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: first states purpose, second adds a critical warning. No unnecessary words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description does not mention return values, success/failure indicators, or the need for a subsequent apply action. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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%, so the description should explain parameters. It does not clarify what 'uuid' represents or why 'confirm' must be true, leaving the agent to infer from the name and enum.

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 ('Toggle') and the resource ('Source NAT rule's enabled state'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like add, delete, get, list, update.

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?

No guidance on when to use toggle versus the update tool, or prerequisites (e.g., rule must exist). The warning about confirmation is present but lacks context about when this tool is preferred.

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