set_approval_mode

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the key behavioral difference: confirm requires approval per trade, autonomous executes within risk limits without asking. This gives the agent enough insight into the operational impact, though it does not cover details like permission requirements or scope.

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, with a clear opening sentence followed by a structured listing of the two modes. Every line contributes information, and the safe default is called out, ensuring the agent quickly grasps the tool's behavior.

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 setter with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the core functionality and mode semantics. It could be improved by noting how it relates to start_autonomous_loop, but it remains sufficiently complete for selecting and invoking this 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 description adds critical meaning for the single 'mode' parameter by defining the two possible values ('confirm' and 'autonomous'). The schema provides no enum or description, making this definition essential for correct invocation.

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 uses the specific verb 'toggle' and identifies the resource 'trading approval mode', clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like start_autonomous_loop. It details the two possible modes, making the tool's function unambiguous.

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?

It provides clear context for each mode, noting that 'confirm' is the 'safe default' and 'autonomous' executes without asking, which implies when each should be used. However, it does not explicitly mention exclusions or contrast with sibling tools such as start_autonomous_loop.

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