Set Onboarding Persona

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

Adds value beyond annotations by explaining what the setting affects (module visibility, chart-of-accounts, checklist). Annotations already provide idempotentHint; description confirms and elaborates on consequences.

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?

English portion is front-loaded and clear, but the Spanish duplicate adds roughly 50% more text unnecessarily. Still overall concise and well-structured.

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 the tool's simplicity (one enum parameter, idempotent, no destructive effects), the description covers purpose, behavior, and parameter meaning fully. Output schema exists to handle return values.

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?

Adds meaning to the single parameter by explaining each persona with real-world context (e.g., 'autonomo' means self-employed in Spain). Schema coverage is 100% but description enriches understanding significantly.

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?

Clearly states it sets the workspace persona and enumerates the four supported personas with descriptions. Differentiates from sibling 'onboarding_status' which likely reads rather than writes.

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?

Explicitly states idempotent behavior (no-op on repeated calls) but does not compare with alternatives like 'onboarding_status'. The description implies when to use but lacks explicit when-not context.

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