project_set_profile

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It does disclose one useful behavioral trait—that profile overrides width/height/fps if set—but omits side effects, persistence, reversibility, permissions, or whether at least one argument must be provided.

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?

Opens with a single-sentence purpose followed by a clean, scannable Args block. It is appropriately concise; the parameter names duplicate schema properties, but the added descriptions justify the repetition.

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?

Covers all parameter meanings and includes an output schema, so return values do not need explanation. However, with zero required parameters and no annotations, it does not clarify whether at least one argument is needed or how profile changes propagate through the project, leaving moderate ambiguity.

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 0%, so the description compensates by listing all eight parameters with units and contextual meanings. It adds the preset enum for profile and the key relationship that profile overrides width/height/fps, which the schema alone does not convey.

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?

States a specific action and resource: 'Set or update the project's video profile.' This clearly differentiates from sibling getters like project_get_profile and project_list_profiles, whose names and purposes are distinct.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. It does not mention using project_list_profiles to enumerate available profiles or project_get_profile to inspect current settings, leaving selection entirely to inference.

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