Toggle a list's optional columns

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavior: 'Only the keys you pass are changed', which clarifies partial update semantics. It also names the specific columns affected. However, it omits details like whether this is a write-only operation, permission requirements, or any side effects. The word 'toggles' is slightly ambiguous (could imply flipping rather than setting), but the statement about passing keys clarifies it.

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 two sentences, immediately front-loaded with the primary action and object. It lists the specific columns concisely and adds the crucial partial-update note without unnecessary fluff. Every word earns its place.

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 a simple nested object and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers all parameter effects and the main behavioral nuance. However, it does not mention that listId must reference an existing list or how the tool handles invalid inputs, but given the simplicity this is a minor gap.

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 compensates by listing all six boolean fields with human-readable labels (item images, prices, worn, consumable, list description, total pack weight). It also explains the semantics of the fields object: only keys passed are changed. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though it does not individually detail each field's effect in depth.

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 tool's function: 'Toggles which optional columns show for a list' followed by a specific list of columns (item images, prices, worn, consumable, list description, total pack weight). This specific verb+resource distinguishes it from siblings like set_list_description or set_item_worn, making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

The description provides clear context: it is for changing optional column visibility on a list. It implies this is the tool for list-level display settings, not for per-item modifications like set_item_worn. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, so it stops short of a 5.

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