set_throttle_limit_percent

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

Given no annotations, the description carries the burden well. It discloses that this is a setter for a configuration parameter, specifies the valid range and default, and notes the activation condition. It does not mention persistence or side effects, but the tool is straightforward and the description is sufficient.

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 sentence with a qualifier and bracket-enclosed details. It is concise and front-loaded, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating the dependency). Still, every part earns its place with minimal waste.

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 single-parameter setter, the description is largely complete. It covers the action, the dependency, and value constraints. It does not explain the return value (likely void or success), but that is acceptable without an output schema. The sibling getter exists, so the pair is well-documented.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by contextualizing the parameter as the 'maximum throttle percentage' and specifying the condition (when throttle_limit_type is active), which goes beyond the schema's basic description of the value.

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 tool sets the 'Maximum throttle percentage when throttle_limit_type is active', using the verb 'Set' and specifying the resource. It includes the data type, range, and default value, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_throttle_limit_percent and set_throttle_limit_type.

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 when setting the throttle limit percentage, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the dependency on throttle_limit_type being active, but provides no guidance on when not to use it or which alternatives exist.

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