Turn AI features on or off

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a mutating toggle but does not disclose persistence, side effects on existing AI workflows, permission requirements, or the response/return behavior after the switch.

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?

One compact sentence communicates the operation, scope, and admin location with no filler. Every phrase earns its place, and the key verb/object combination is front-loaded.

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-boolean toggle with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core need: what is switched, where, and for what scope. It is slightly incomplete regarding how to inspect the resulting state or whether the setting is site-wide vs. user-specific, but the core invocation is clear.

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 for the lone parameter. 'On or off' maps directly to the boolean `enabled` value, and 'AI features for this site' clarifies what the parameter controls, adding meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 states a specific action ('Switch'), a clear resource ('the AI features of the plugin'), and a precise scope ('for this site'), with the UI location (Sweipe → AI). This differentiates it from read/status/build siblings such as sweipe_status and sweipe_ai_build.

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 implies the tool is for enabling or disabling AI features on a site, but it does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives or mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The scope and UI location provide context, but no direct routing guidance is given.

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