toggle_modifier_visibility

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

The description says 'Toggle', which implies a state switch that is not idempotent (calling twice returns to original state). However, annotations include idempotentHint: true, which directly contradicts the described behavior. This is a serious inconsistency that could mislead an agent into assuming repeated calls have no additional effect.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and scope. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundant information.

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, and the description captures the core functionality. However, the contradiction between the description and the idempotentHint annotation creates confusion, and the lack of parameter semantics leaves gaps in understanding the exact behavior. An output schema exists, but the description still fails to clarify the toggle semantics fully.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description only mentions 'viewport' and 'render' without explaining the meaning of boolean values or null defaults. It does not clarify what true/false/null control, nor does it describe the required 'object' and 'modifier' parameters beyond their names. The description adds minimal value over the schema.

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'), the resource ('modifier visibility'), and the scope ('in viewport and/or render'). It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_modifier_property, which is a broader property setter.

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 implies when to use the tool (to toggle modifier visibility in viewport or render). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough for an agent to choose this over more generic property setters.

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