npm_disable_stream

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about reversibility, idempotency, permission requirements, or what disabling actually does to traffic on the stream. For a state-changing mutation tool this is a significant omission.

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?

"Disable a stream" is front-loaded and free of waste, but at two words it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise. It earns its place but contributes almost no information beyond the tool name.

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?

Although the tool is simple (one required parameter) and has no output schema, the total absence of annotations and of any behavioral or usage context means an agent cannot confirm side effects or reversibility. The description is too thin for a mutation operation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single stream_id parameter is documented in the schema as "The ID of the stream to disable." The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ("Disable") and resource ("a stream"), so the agent knows exactly what action is taken. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from its obvious siblings such as npm_enable_stream or the parallel disable operations on other resources, leaving gaps at the sibling level.

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 use this tool rather than npm_enable_stream, npm_delete_stream, or npm_update_stream, and no prerequisites are mentioned. The agent must infer usage purely from the name.

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