toggle_field

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it sets a checkbox-like field, implying a mutation, but does not disclose what happens if value is omitted (default false), whether it toggles or sets an absolute value, side effects, or error conditions. This is minimal and insufficient.

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, succinct sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to scan.

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 tool with three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the meaning of each parameter, the effect of the default value, or any contextual requirements such as session handling. The tool is simple, but the description does not provide enough for an agent to use it correctly without external knowledge.

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%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It mentions 'checkbox-like field' but does not explain field_name, value, or session_id. No additional meaning is provided beyond the schema's raw property names and defaults.

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 verb 'Set' and the resource 'checkbox-like field', which indicates a boolean field. It is specific enough to distinguish from general field-setting tools like set_field_value, though it does not explicitly name alternatives. The phrase 'using the 1C test client API' adds context, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_field_value or field_value_text. It does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the name and description.

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