Enable/disable the per-message usage footer

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It reveals that the mode persists, affects get_usage's output, and can be overridden by an environment variable. This is valuable context, though it does not mention return values or side effects beyond the setting itself.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a relevant conditional nuance. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 setter with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: persistence, effect on get_usage, and the override condition. It omits where the setting is stored or the exact return value, but these are not critical for understanding how to invoke the tool.

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 only defines 'verbose' as a required boolean with zero description. The tool description explains that 'on' results in a footer from get_usage and mentions the env var override, giving the parameter meaningful context. This compensates well for the lack of schema documentation, though it does not specify defaults or edge cases.

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 action ('Persists verbose mode') and the target resource (per-message usage footer), with the title reinforcing the enable/disable function. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like set_threshold or set_followup.

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 when to use the tool—when you want to enable or disable the usage footer—but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it. The relationship with get_usage is clear, but no exclusions or alternate tool references are provided.

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