set_active_graph

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait: the action switches the live scenario without needing to republish. It doesn't mention permissions or reversibility, but for a simple setter this is adequate transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the action, resource, and a key differentiating constraint efficiently.

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 simple tool with two string params and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers the purpose, the requirement that the graph be published, and the benefit of avoiding republishing. It could add explicit parameter clarifications, but is otherwise complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It implies graphId is a published graph and botId is the bot, but doesn't explicitly define either. The parameter names are self-explanatory, and the description partially bridges the gap by linking them in context.

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 uses a specific verb 'Назначить' (assign) and clearly identifies the resource: which published graph is active for the bot. It also distinguishes from siblings by noting 'без перепубликации' (without republishing), separating it from publish_graph and edit_graph_live.

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?

It provides clear context: switching the live scenario without republishing, which implies when to use this over publish_graph. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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