actiond_profile_set

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

Annotations already indicate idempotent and not destructive. Description adds meaningful context: global application and timing of effect. There is no contradiction between annotations and description.

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 information-dense. The purpose, allowed values, usage recommendations, scope, timing, and return value are each addressed in a single, well-structured paragraph 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?

For a simple profile-switching tool, the description covers what it does, what values exist, when to use them, the scope of effect, and the return value. No additional context is needed to use it correctly.

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 schema already covers the enum values, and the description enriches each with its intended use case. Parameter semantics are fully explained beyond the schema's minimal description.

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 the action ('Switch'), the resource ('execution profile'), and the effect ('controls which CI/CD plugins run'). Distinguishes from siblings like actiond_profile_get by specifying the switching behavior.

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?

Provides explicit guidance for each allowed value: 'fast' for active development, 'full' before merging, 'release' for full CI/CD. Notes that the change applies globally and takes effect on the next event. Does not explicitly contrast with individual plugin controls, but the value-level guidance is sufficient.

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