Тестовый режим терминала

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the sole burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the key toggle behavior and reversibility ('или обратно'), but it says nothing about what test mode changes, whether it affects live processing, or whether authorization is required.

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 front-loaded sentence contains the full purpose with zero filler. The wording is efficient and directly names the resource and the on/off state change.

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?

The tool is a mutation-like toggle with no annotations and no output schema, and one parameter (payload) is effectively opaque. The description is too terse to convey what test mode means, what the payload should contain, or what the response indicates, which an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, and the 'payload' parameter is only vaguely documented in the schema as 'Параметры переключения' with additionalProperties allowed; the tool description does not compensate for that semantic 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 states a specific action and resource: 'Переключает терминал в тестовый режим или обратно' (switches the terminal to test mode or back). This clearly distinguishes it from terminal read tools like wata_terminal_get and wata_terminals_list, though it does not explicitly name a sibling it is not.

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 use case is implied by the verb 'switch': an agent can infer to use it when it wants to enable or disable terminal test mode. However, the description gives no explicit guidance about prerequisites, production implications, or when to prefer alternative terminal tools such as wata_terminal_update.

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