pool_set_enabled

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

Adds significant context beyond the annotations: the exact effect of disabling, the noop behavior for matching state, the preview/apply mechanism, and auditing. This fully explains side effects and state changes, which is critical for a write operation.

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 well-structured. It opens with the core operation in one sentence, adds essential behavioral notes, and ends with a clear parameter list. Every sentence adds value 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?

Given no output schema, the description covers the complete behavioral contract: the operation's effect, preview/apply modes, idempotency, auditing, and parameter provenance. An agent has everything needed to invoke this tool correctly and understand its outcome.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description thoroughly explains all four parameters: pool_id with its source, enabled with its boolean meaning, confirm with its preview/apply behavior, and target with its configuration source. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 specific operation (enable/disable) and resource (desktop pool), including a key behavioral consequence (disabling stops new sessions). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pool_get and pool_list by focusing on state mutation.

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?

Provides useful context: how to preview vs. apply changes, idempotency, and that pool_id comes from pool_list. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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