baasix_realtime_enable

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that the config is stored in the schema definition and that broadcasts happen via WebSocket, which is useful. However, it does not mention idempotency, overwrite behavior, permissions, reversibility, or what happens to existing realtime configuration when this tool is called.

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: three sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. The second and third sentences earn their place by explaining the broadcast effect and where the configuration is stored.

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 enable operation with fully described parameters, this is adequate. It is missing an expected return/output description and any explicit relation to sibling realtime tools, which matters more because there is no output schema and no annotations to fill those gaps.

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 the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'specific actions to broadcast' loosely maps to the actions parameter, but it adds little beyond the schema's own descriptions and does not clarify replicaIdentityFull beyond what the schema already states.

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?

States a specific action and resource — 'Enable realtime for a collection' — and adds a concrete observable effect: changes are broadcast via WebSocket when data is modified. It is clearly distinct from siblings like baasix_realtime_disable and baasix_realtime_status, though it does not name them explicitly.

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 intended use is implied by the verb 'Enable', but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no comparison to related tools such as baasix_realtime_config or baasix_realtime_disable. An agent must infer the correct context from the tool name and schema.

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