state_settle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose two traits: the operation is gentle and it is not a hard reset. It leaves undefined what 'Ruhewert' means, what side effects occur, and how the tool affects the state, so the disclosure is partial.

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 consists of two short sentences, each carrying useful information: the gentle regulation behavior and the explicit negative that it is not a hard reset. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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?

Although the tool is simple with one optional parameter, the description still leaves key facts unspecified: what 'Ruhewert' is, how fraction changes behavior, and what the expected result or side effects are. With no annotations or output schema, the agent has too little context to confidently select and invoke this tool.

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% and the description never mentions the 'fraction' parameter or its meaning. The word 'Sanft' hints that fraction may control gentleness, but the agent cannot tell whether fraction is a target, a step size, or a weight. Since the description does not compensate for the missing schema description, this is a weak area.

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 states a specific action—'Sanft Richtung Ruhewert regulieren'—which tells the reader the tool adjusts something gently toward a resting value. It also adds 'Kein harter Reset' to clarify the operation is not a hard reset, which prevents confusing it with a reset operation. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with the sibling state tools, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternative tool suggestions. 'Kein harter Reset' only implies that the tool should not be used when a hard reset is intended, without specifying when it should be chosen over the listed siblings like state_inject or state_prompt.

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