toggle_consumer_key

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose behavioral consequences. It communicates that the change is temporary and reversible, but it does not explain what happens to already-issued keys/sessions, whether there are rate-limit or permission implications, or how the toggle interacts with revocation.

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?

A single, tight sentence with no filler. It front-loads the key action and expresses scope and temporality in very few words.

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 minimal two-parameter tool without an output schema, the description carries an adequate but not complete picture. It gives the intent and the temporal qualifier, but the omission of behavioral details and the lack of a clear distinction from revoke/reactivate leave an agent to infer too much.

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 schema already documents both required parameters with 100% coverage, giving clear descriptions for 'enabled' and 'consumer_id'. The description adds no new parameter-level detail beyond the schema; 'enable/disable' maps directly onto the boolean 'enabled' field.

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 names a specific verb-action ('enable/disable') and a specific resource ('consumer API key'), with 'Temporarily' adding scope. It is unambiguous about the core operation, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like revoke_consumer_key or reactivate_consumer_key.

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 word 'Temporarily' is an implied usage cue for short-term, reversible toggling rather than permanent revocation. However, the description never explicitly names the appropriate alternative for when 'temporary' is not the right choice, so the guidance remains mostly implicit.

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