Create Profile

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait beyond basic creation: the tool automatically switches to the new profile. This is a significant side effect. The annotations only indicate it is not read-only (readOnlyHint=false), so the description adds valuable context. However, it does not mention error conditions (e.g., duplicate names) or prerequisites, but for a simple creation mutation, the disclosure is adequate.

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 concise sentence that efficiently communicates both the primary action and the side effect. There is zero redundancy, and the structure is front-loaded with the verb and resource. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and clear annotations, the description is mostly complete. It covers the purpose and side effect, but could mention that the profile must have a unique name or that OBS must be running. However, given the simplicity and existing annotations, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use it correctly without additional context.

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 has 100% description coverage: the profileName parameter is documented as 'Name for the new profile'. The tool description adds no additional parameter insights, but since schema coverage is high, the baseline of 3 applies. The description does not need to reiterate the parameter details.

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 action: 'Creates a new profile' and includes a specific side effect, 'switching to it in the process'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like obs-set-current-profile (which only switches) and obs-remove-profile. It uses a specific verb and resource, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 usage (create and switch) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it. No mention of 'use obs-set-current-profile if the profile already exists' etc. It provides context but lacks explicit exclusion or alternative guidance, which would improve decision-making among profile-related tools.

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