configure_workers

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

The description does not disclose important behavioral aspects such as whether the configuration persists, whether it overwrites existing settings, or whether it affects the current session immediately. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only states the general purpose, leaving significant ambiguity for a state-changing configuration tool.

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 a single sentence with embedded examples, no fluff or repetition. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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?

The description covers the core functionality and usage pattern adequately for a single-parameter tool with no output schema. It lacks details on side effects and scope of changes, but the overall purpose and interaction pattern are clear enough for basic invocation.

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 provides 100% coverage with a clear description and an example. The tool description adds an additional example ('Set Aider as default') that enriches contextual understanding beyond the schema, providing extra clarity on the accepted instruction format.

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 uses a specific verb 'Configure' with a clear resource ('which CLI tools handle which tasks'). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling configure_model, which targets model configuration rather than tool-task routing.

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 provides concrete natural language examples ('Use Claude for coding', 'Set Aider as default') that illustrate when and how to use the tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the examples are illustrative enough for an agent to infer usage.

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