km_enable_macro

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

The description mentions a state change but does not disclose side effects, permissions needed, or error scenarios. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, which it fails to meet adequately.

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 sentence but is under-specified for a state-modifying tool. It could be more informative without being verbose; brevity sacrifices necessary detail.

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?

Given two required parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It should mention potential effects, error conditions, or what happens if the macro does not exist.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema parameter descriptions, simply restating the tool's function without elaborating on the parameters.

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 'Enable or disable' and the resource 'macro', distinguishing it from sibling tools like km_create_macro or km_run_macro. However, it lacks extra context about the specific effect of enabling/disabling.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as whether it is for toggling active state or persisting changes. The description implies usage only by stating the action.

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