thetacog-switch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses side effects (saves context, loads configuration) and return value (anchor and rules). However, it omits potential nuances like whether the context is saved permanently or just for the session.

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 two concise sentences with the main action upfront. Every sentence adds value without verbosity.

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 adequately explains return values. It covers the core behavior with two parameters. However, it could clarify what happens if no context is provided (the schema marks it optional) and whether the switch is immediate.

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% as both parameters have descriptions. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; it echoes the schema's mention of saving context. No additional insight is provided about the parameters.

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 verb 'Switch to a different cognitive room' and specifies the effects: saving context, loading new configuration, and returning anchor and identity rules. This distinguishes it from siblings like thetacog-next (which likely moves sequentially) and thetacog-open (which may open without saving).

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 usage for switching rooms but does not explicitly guide the agent on when to use this tool versus alternatives like thetacog-next or thetacog-open. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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