set_power_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=false, so the agent knows the safety profile. The description adds nothing beyond that — it doesn't say whether the change persists across reboots, whether it requires privileges, or what it affects downstream (fan curve, battery life, performance).

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?

One short sentence with zero waste, but it is under-specified rather than concise — every word merely echoes the name. There's room for a clarifying clause at no length cost.

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?

A one-parameter mutation tool with full schema coverage and annotations has a low bar, but the description still omits what the profile change actually does to the system and how it interacts with sibling power-related tools. It is technically callable but not intelligently so.

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% and the enum already enumerates performance/balanced/power-saver with a description on the property. The description adds no extra meaning, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Set the power profile" restates the tool name word-for-word, adding no detail about what a power profile controls (CPU governor, TLP/ppd profile, etc.). The only differentiation from the sibling get_power_profile comes from the verb in the name itself, not the description.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (toggle_gamemode, suspend_system, set_hypr_option) or when system-wide effects make it inappropriate. The enum implies three choices but the description never says when each is warranted.

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