polynodes_ringmod_switch

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and repeatability profile is covered. The description's only addition, 'Returns: JSON confirmation', duplicates the existing output schema and adds no behavioral context beyond what structured fields provide.

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 first sentence is front-loaded and precise, and the Args/Returns boilerplate is short. The blocks are conventional filler but not wasteful enough to hurt readability.

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 toggle with rich annotations and an output schema, the definition covers what an agent needs to call it. It falls short only on usage context relative to the many sibling effect switches.

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 itself documents the state field with '0.0 = off, 1.0 = on', so the semantics are already available. The description's 'params: state.' restates the parameter name without adding format or value meaning, so it earns only the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb (turn on/off) and resource (Ring Modulator), which cleanly distinguishes it from the sibling polynodes_ringmod_freq that sets the same effect's frequency rather than its power state.

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?

There is no guidance on when to toggle this versus other effect switches, nor any mention of prerequisites such as the effect being loaded. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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