use_profile

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that connectivity is validated before switching, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., impact on existing connections, behavior on validation failure). The disclosure is present but minimal.

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 a single sentence of 9 words, highly efficient with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action ('Switch the current database profile') and adds a key behavioral note in parentheses.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and a notable behavioral trait (validation). It could mention error handling or return value, but current info is sufficient for basic use. Slightly below max due to omitted details.

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% (the one parameter 'name' has a clear description). The tool description does not add extra meaning to the parameter beyond the schema; it only repeats the validation behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's action: 'Switch the current database profile' with a specific resource (profile) and a distinguishing behavior (validates connectivity). This differentiates it from siblings like 'current_profile' (show current) and 'list_profiles' (list available).

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 context (when you need to switch profiles and validate connectivity) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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