pve_firewall_set_enabled

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses high-risk behavior: mutation type, dry-run default, synchronous execution, specific lockout risks (port 22/8006), and cluster scope as master kill-switch. Comprehensive and honest.

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?

Extremely concise, front-loaded with risk level, uses formatting for emphasis. Every sentence adds critical information with no redundancy.

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 the presence of an output schema (not shown) and the high-risk nature, the description covers essential behavioral aspects. Could expand on the meaning of 'scope' and the 'confirm' parameter relationship, but overall adequate.

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 only 14% (only proximo_target has a description). The description adds meaning for 'confirm' (dry-run default) and partially for 'scope', but fails to explain the other parameters (kind, node, vmid, enabled, proximo_target). Does not compensate fully for the low coverage.

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?

Clearly states 'toggle the firewall on or off for the given scope', using a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling pve_firewall_* tools which manage specific components (aliases, rules, etc.) by targeting the global enable/disable action.

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?

Provides context like 'Dry-run by default' and risk warnings, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives. However, the sibling tools are clearly different (manage specific firewall entities), so the purpose is unambiguous.

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