toggle_builtin_tools

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It clearly defines the meaning of each action ('on' blocks built-in tools, 'off' allows them) and states the return format (JSON with current status and deny list). It does not disclose the scope (e.g., session vs persistent), but for a simple toggle, this is a reasonable disclosure.

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 exactly two sentences with no filler. It leads with the core purpose, then unpacks the parameter and return value in a structured manner. Each sentence serves a distinct informative role.

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 single-parameter tool, the description covers the purpose, the parameter values and their behavior, and the return structure. Although it doesn't mention the scope of the toggle, the overall picture is sufficiently complete for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 only describes 'action' as 'Action type' with an enum, but the description enriches each enum value with semantics: 'on' blocks, 'off' allows, 'status' checks. This goes beyond the schema's minimal description, so the description adds meaningful 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 tool toggles Claude Code's built-in WebSearch and WebFetch tools on/off, using the specific verb 'toggle' and naming the precise resources. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like web_search/web_fetch (which are the targets) and get_config_info/switch_model (which handle other settings).

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 explains the action parameter (on/off/status) and thus implies when to use the tool, but it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it. It does not mention that to actually perform a search, one should use web_search instead. Hence, usage guidance is only implicit, not explicit.

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