psu_recall

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states 'Recall a saved preset' without mentioning side effects, whether current settings are overwritten, output state changes, or failure modes. This is a mutation-like operation with no behavioral detail.

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 leading sentence followed by a compact Args line. Every word earns its place, the action is front-loaded, and there is no filler or redundancy.

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 one-parameter tool, the description is short but missing important context: no prerequisites, side effects, or relation to psu_save are mentioned. With no annotations and only an output schema, the behavioral context remains under-specified for an agent to invoke this correctly in all situations.

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 input schema only defines 'preset' as an integer with no description. The description adds 'Preset number (1–5)', giving the parameter clear meaning and a validation range. With 0% schema description coverage, this adequately compensates for the schema gap.

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 ('Recall') on a specific resource ('a saved preset on the power supply') and provides the valid range (1–5), making it distinct from sibling tools like psu_save. An agent can tell what this tool does without inspecting the schema.

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?

No when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The description only defines the action and does not contrast with psu_save or other psu_set_* commands, nor mention prerequisites such as an existing saved preset.

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