Enable 404 host

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

The description provides no behavioral details beyond the minimal purpose. No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. Fails to disclose what enabling entails (e.g., flag setting, routing changes, reversibility), permissions required, or potential side effects. This is insufficient for a state-modifying tool.

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 extremely concise (5 words), but this conciseness comes at the cost of clarity. While no extraneous words exist, it is under-specified for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 tool's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema), the description fails to provide sufficient context. It does not clarify the meaning of 'id,' the state change (enabling vs. disabling), or how this tool relates to siblings. Agent is left guessing.

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 must explain parameters. It makes no mention of the 'id' parameter, leaving its meaning (identifier of the dead host to enable) implicit. An agent would have to infer from tool name, which is unreliable.

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 'Enable a 404 host,' using a specific verb ('enable') and resource ('404 host'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'disable' and 'create' variations. However, 'dead host' is a domain-specific term that may not be immediately clear to all agents.

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 this tool versus alternatives (e.g., vs. npm_disable_dead_host or npm_update_dead_host). Does not mention prerequisites such as the host needing to exist and be disabled. No exclusionary criteria or context provided.

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