manage_profiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does so exceptionally well by describing persistence in config.toml, immediate effect, closing the old browser first, and switching isolated CV, database/application, and browser-login folders.

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 and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by necessary side-effect details and a usage tip. Every sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy.

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 side effects of switch are well documented, but there is no output schema and the description does not state what 'list' returns. It also omits the relationship between the 'profile' parameter and the switch action. These are notable gaps for an otherwise strong description.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains what the action values 'list' and 'switch' mean, but it never explicitly defines the 'profile' parameter, its necessity for switch, or the default behavior. The user can infer the meaning, but the description does not spell it out.

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 opens with a precise verb-resource pair: 'List candidate profiles or switch the active candidate.' It clearly distinguishes this profile-management tool from sibling tools like list_cvs or start_application, and the two action modes are both stated explicitly.

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 gives an explicit when-to-use directive: 'Always list/verify profiles before a search or application task for a named person.' It does not discuss exclusions or name alternative tools, but the context for using the tool is clear.

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