set_perceived_effort

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the 0-10 scale, the clear-on-0 behavior, and the internal ×10 storage conversion, giving useful beyond-the-basics context. It does not cover edge cases like out-of-range values or error conditions, but the key behavioral traits are transparent.

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 tightly structured: a one-line purpose, a short explanation of scale and storage conversion, and a compact Args list. Every sentence conveys necessary information without padding.

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 two-parameter setter, the description covers the task, value range, clearing behavior, and internal conversion, and an output schema exists so return values need not be described. It lacks explicit prerequisites or when-not-to-use guidance, but the core calling context is complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the Args section fully compensates by defining activity_id as the target activity and rpe as a 0-10 perceived effort value where 0 clears the rating. This adds meaning to both parameters beyond their raw types in the input schema.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Set the perceived effort (RPE) for an activity'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It names the exact attribute and scale, distinguishing it from sibling setters like set_activity_name and set_activity_feel.

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 explains how the RPE rating works and that 0 clears it, which implies the tool is for assigning or removing perceived effort. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or mention exclusions/prerequisites, so usage guidance is mostly implicit.

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