rdsh_farm_action

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a key non-obvious behavior: disabling does not terminate existing sessions. It could also state idempotency or error behavior, but the core operational semantics are clear.

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 concise sentences front-load the exact operation and then add the most important behavioral nuance. No wasted words.

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?

Adequately complete for a simple action tool: it names the resource, the state change, the batch scope, and the key side-effect (existing sessions continue). An output schema is present, so omitting return-details is acceptable. Missing only edge behaviors like idempotency.

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 already describes both parameters (action enum with descriptions, farm_ids array), so the description adds little parameter-level value. It reinforces the action semantics but does not go beyond the structured coverage.

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?

Clearly identifies the verb (enable/disable), resource (RDS farms), and scope (one or more). This is unlikely to be confused with sibling tools like list_rdsh_farms, create_rdsh_farm, or delete_rdsh_farm.

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?

Provides clear context for when the disable action is appropriate: draining a farm before maintenance. It does not explicitly contrast with alternative sibling tools, but the use case is specific enough to guide selection.

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