gnosys_toolset

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

Annotations mark this as a non-readonly but idempotent, non-destructive mutation, and the description adds the crucial context that switching affects 'this session' and returns added/removed tool names. That session-scoped effect goes beyond the annotations, though the exact return shape of an unchanged inspect is left implicit.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences front-load the capability, then the switching semantics, then a compact example. Nothing is redundant relative to the schema.

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-param, no-output-schema tool, the description covers defaults, action vs inspection, session scope, and an example. A little more on what the returned catalog actually contains would close the remaining 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 coverage is 100%, so the param is already documented. The description reinforces meaning with the omit-to-inspect rule and a worked example ({"set":"standard"}), adding practical clarity beyond the enum description.

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 specific verbs (list, set) and resources (active tier, higher-tier tool catalog, added/removed tool names), and names the exact enum values. This is clearly distinguishable from the sibling memory/query tools.

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?

Explains the inspect-vs-switch decision ('omit set to inspect without switching') and the default ('starts on core'), plus a concrete example. Clear context, though it doesn't explicitly name when other tools should be preferred over switching tiers.

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