Remember the dashboard confirmation choice

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

Annotations already convey idempotent and non-destructive traits; the description adds that setting true persists 'from then on' and that model-initiated care is unaffected. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two compact sentences front-load the core behavior and scope with no filler. Every sentence adds relevant information.

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 simple preference-setting tool, the description covers behavior, scope, and persistence. Full schema documentation and an output schema handle parameter and return-value details, leaving no meaningful gaps.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description reinforces the persistence behavior of skipCareConfirmation but adds no new meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description states a specific action: remembering/setting whether the AI Coach dashboard asks for confirmation before care buttons take effect. The 'Dashboard use only' clause clearly differentiates it from model-requested care and from sibling tools like commit_ai_coach_care.

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?

Explicitly states dashboard-only scope and that model-requested care is always confirmed, giving a clear when-not. It does not name specific alternative tools, but the usage boundary is unambiguous.

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