table_toggle_delete_mark

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the action toggles a mark, but does not explain persistence, repeated-toggle semantics, whether data is mutated, or what happens if no current row exists.

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 a single focused sentence with no filler, and the action is front-loaded. However, the brevity comes at the cost of omitting important context, so it does not earn the top score.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves key invocation context unexplained: how the table is identified, what session_id is for, what 'current row' means, and what the tool returns or changes. This is not complete enough for reliable invocation.

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 0%, and the description names none of the three parameters. The meanings of name, title, and session_id are left entirely to inference, so the agent cannot tell what values are needed or how they map to the operation.

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 action ('toggle') and target ('delete mark on the current row'), making the core operation clear. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like table_delete_row, but the verb and resource are concrete enough to identify the tool's purpose.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as table_delete_row or table_find_row. The phrase 'current row' implies a prerequisite, but the description never states that the row must be selected or how this differs from actually deleting a row.

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