gitchanger_set_default

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and largely fails it. It says nothing about whether the change is persistent, whether it affects the currently active profile, whether it overwrites an existing default, or whether errors occur for unknown profile IDs — all relevant for a configuration mutation.

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?

One short front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than tight compression of rich content.

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 tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the definition is minimally adequate. The gaps are the unannotated mutation semantics and the unresolved default-versus-switch distinction, which matter given the dense sibling set.

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% and the single parameter is documented as "Profile ID to set as default," so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format hints, no indication of what a valid ID looks like, and no note on whether an ID or profile name is accepted.

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?

"Set a profile as the default GitChanger profile" names a specific verb and resource, so the basic action is unambiguous. However, it never distinguishes "default" from the sibling gitchanger_switch, so an agent cannot tell from the description whether setting a default also activates the profile or how it relates to switching.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus gitchanger_switch, gitchanger_add, or gitchanger_list, and no stated prerequisites such as the profile having to exist first. The agent must infer the choice entirely from sibling names.

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