wafle_users_switch_tenant

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

The description goes beyond the idempotentHint annotation by disclosing that the tool returns the membership for the tenant and errors with `wafle_users_no_membership` if the user is not a member. This adds useful behavioral context not captured in structured fields.

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 compact and front-loaded, consisting of two sentences that directly state the purpose, effect, return value, and error condition. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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?

With a single parameter and no output schema, the description covers all essential information: the session state change, the return value (membership), and the error scenario. It is complete for the tool's simplicity and rich sibling context.

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?

The input schema already provides a complete description of `tenant_id` (numeric tenant id, CPT post id of the store) with 100% coverage. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema offers, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action: setting the session's `current_tenant_id` so subsequent calls apply to that tenant. It distinguishes this from sibling tools by explaining the effect on subsequent calls and mentioning the membership return value.

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 explains when to use this tool: when you want subsequent calls without an explicit `/stores/<slug>/` path to apply to a specific tenant. It implies the alternative of using explicit paths, but does not explicitly name alternative tools or list exclusions.

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