config_use

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it discloses that this mutates global state (which profile cli operates against), that no re-authentication is needed, and the error behavior when the profile is absent. It does not describe whether the switch is persistent across sessions or reversible, which is a minor gap.

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?

Front-loads the core action, then prerequisites, then return behavior in four tight sentences with no filler. Slightly overlaps with the schema's parameter note but nothing is wasted.

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 one-parameter state-switching tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies prerequisite, discovery path, no-reauth behavior, and return semantics. Everything an agent needs to call it correctly is present.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter's schema description already tells the agent to consult 'config_show' for valid names. The description largely repeats that guidance rather than adding format or constraint detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 verb (Switch) and resource (active project profile), and scopes the effect to the 'cli' tool's commands. An agent can distinguish it from config_show (read), config_remove (delete), and projects_use without opening schemas.

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 says to use it 'to move between already-connected projects without re-authenticating', states the prerequisite that the profile must already exist (created by 'projects_use' or 'login_direct'), and routes to 'config_show' for discovery of valid names. Both the when and the alternative are named.

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