set_autonomy_level

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that it modifies a config file and requires human confirmation. The three-level explanation adds behavioral context. However, it could note side effects or permanence.

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?

Every sentence is informative: purpose, level definitions, behavioral impact. No redundant or missing elements. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 set tool with one parameter, it covers main aspects. Lacks return value or error info, but the behavioral note (requires confirmation) is valuable. Could reference 'get_autonomy_level' for completeness.

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?

The description compensates for 0% schema coverage by fully explaining the 'level' parameter's allowed values (0,1,2) and their meanings. This adds essential semantics beyond the schema's integer type.

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 explicitly states 'Set the autonomy tier' and enumerates the three levels with clear definitions. This distinguishes it from its sibling 'get_autonomy_level' and related tools like 'check_autonomy'.

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 explains the impact (updates config, requires human confirmation) and level behaviors. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

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