disable_telemetry

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the file creation side effect (~/.tokencast/no-telemetry), the permanence of the action, and clarifies the scope to anonymous telemetry. It doesn't mention reversibility or impact on already collected data, but for a simple opt-out toggle, this is adequate.

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 crisp sentences, front-loaded with the primary verb and purpose, with no filler. Every word adds value, including the file path and opt-out context.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description fully explains what it does, how it does it (file creation), and when to use it. Further elaboration would be redundant given the tool's simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is 100% covered (though empty). The description doesn't need to explain param semantics since none exist, and it still clarifies the tool's behavior without them.

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 explicitly states the action ('Permanently disable anonymous telemetry'), identifies the specific resource, and even mentions the side effect of creating a file. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on cost estimation and reporting.

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 phrase 'Use this to opt out of usage data collection' provides explicit when-to-use guidance. No alternatives are needed since sibling tools serve entirely different purposes (cost, calibration, reporting), making the intended use unambiguous.

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