p4_stream_switch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects, such as requiring a clean workspace, rejecting pending changes, or how the 'force' parameter affects behavior. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 short sentence with no unnecessary words, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently detailed. It lacks the context that would make it genuinely useful, so conciseness is not fully achieved.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must explain behavior, side effects, and usage context. It does not mention what happens to pending changes, whether files are updated, or how 'force' interacts with workspace state, making it incomplete for a tool with potentially destructive operations.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the parameters ('stream', 'path', 'force') are already well documented. The description adds no additional semantic meaning, but the schema baseline of 3 applies because no compensation is needed.

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 states a specific verb ('Switch') and resource ('workspace' to a 'stream'), making the core purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like p4_client_switch, which could be confused for a similar operation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like p4_client_switch or p4_stream_edit. It does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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