investec_card_toggle_programmable

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. 'Toggle on/off' implies state change but does not disclose the impact (e.g., whether existing code is affected, if confirmation is needed, or if the operation is reversible). This lack of transparency could lead to unexpected outcomes.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose without waste. Every word is necessary.

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 simple toggle with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks behavioral context and usage conditions. It partially meets the needs of an AI agent but could be more informative.

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% and the single parameter 'cardKey' is described clearly in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'toggle on/off', so it meets the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 verb 'toggle' and the resource 'programmable banking feature on a specific card', effectively communicating the core action. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools focused on code execution or card creation. However, it could be more precise about what 'programmable feature' entails.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any prerequisites or conditions for toggling the feature. The agent is left without context on appropriate use cases.

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