opn_toggle_firewall_rule

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

Discloses important behavioral traits: savepoint protection details for OPNsense < 26.7, auto-revert in 60 seconds unless confirmed, and the change in behavior on 26.7+. It also warns about the risk of lockout and guides the user to check opn_mcp_info. This adds significant context beyond the schema.

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 concise and structured with clear paragraphs: first sentence is the core purpose, then usage, then savepoint specifics, then pre-conditions. It is a bit longer than needed but every sentence provides essential operational detail, so it earns its place.

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 complexity (version-dependent behavior, destructive risk, and single parameter), the description covers key aspects: prerequisites, safety measures, and return format. It lacks some details like error handling or exact response structure, but the output schema exists, so the description complements it well.

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 zero description coverage for the 'uuid' parameter, but the description explicitly states to find the UUID via opn_list_firewall_rules and that the uuid is returned in the output. This adds enough semantic context to compensate for the schema's lack of description.

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 'Toggle a firewall filter rule's enabled/disabled state' with a specific verb (toggle) and resource (firewall filter rule), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like opn_list_firewall_rules and opn_update_firewall_rule by focusing on the enable/disable flip.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when you need to temporarily disable a rule for testing or re-enable a previously disabled rule' and offers clear alternatives: 'Use opn_list_firewall_rules first to find the UUID' and 'take a config backup with opn_download_config'.

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