vs_toggle

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true), the description specifies that disabling stops all traffic, requires confirmed=True for execution, and previews without it. It also notes enabling is always safe and returns a one-line result, adding valuable behavioral context.

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 well-structured into sections (main verb, behavior, safety, args) and concise (around 6 lines). It is front-loaded with the key action and adds only necessary details.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature, the description covers prerequisites (vs_status), safety, return type, and all parameters. It is complete for an agent to use correctly, especially with an output schema available.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains all three parameters: name as 'Exact Virtual Service name,' enable as 'true to enable, false to disable,' and the confirmed parameter's role in safety. This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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 purpose: 'Enable or disable a Virtual Service.' This specific verb-resource pair distinguishes it from sibling tools like vs_list (list) and pool_member_enable (enable pool member).

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 advises using vs_status first to check current state and explains the safety requirement for disabling (confirmed=True). It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives like vs_list.

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