load_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states the effect ('machine will use these settings when brewing starts'), which is helpful. However, it omits important details like error handling (invalid profile_id), safety during ongoing operations, or whether the action is reversible. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences, concise and front-loaded. Every word adds value: first sentence identifies the action and resource, second sentence clarifies the timing. No wasted text.

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 (single required parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential use case. It could be more complete by noting that it returns a success/failure indication, but the absence of an output schema reduces the need. Considering the sibling tools and complexity, it is largely sufficient.

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 description coverage is 100% (the parameter `profile_id` has a clear description in the schema). The tool description adds no further meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'load' and the resource 'profile', and specifies that it applies to 'the next espresso extraction.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like `get_profile` (retrieves) or `list_profiles` (lists), as it explicitly sets a profile for future use.

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 implies when to use (before brewing), but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. For instance, it does not warn against loading during an active extraction, nor does it mention using `get_last_profile` to check the current profile. The context is clear but not exhaustive.

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