altium_save_project

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds genuinely new context: an environment/mode prerequisite, the dry-run-vs-commit gate, and the fact that saving cannot be undone with Ctrl+Z. This complements rather than repeats the structured hints.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action description, then the operational prerequisite, then the confirm semantics and irreversibility. Every sentence carries actionable information with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description still supplies the env precondition, confirm gate, and irreversibility, leaving nothing an agent needs missing before invoking a destructive save.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter 'confirm' has no schema description, but the description fully compensates by defining both values' behavior: false lists what would be saved, true actually saves. That is exactly the meaning an agent needs.

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?

States a specific verb 'Save' plus the resource and scope: 'the open, modified sheets of the project to disk'. No sibling tool performs saving, so the boundary against the many list/get/set siblings is unambiguous from the description alone.

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?

Gives a concrete precondition ('Needs ALTIUM_LITE_MODE=read_write_save') and explains the two operating modes: confirm=false is a dry-run listing, confirm=true performs the save. It does not name an alternative or state when not to use it, but no sibling competes for this action.

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