set_timelapse

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the state change and scope, but does not mention whether the setting persists, whether it affects ongoing prints, required permissions, or what response the agent should expect.

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 direct sentence with no filler. The action and scope are immediately clear and front-loaded.

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 two-parameter state toggle, the description and schema cover the core mechanics of setting the value and choosing a target printer. However, missing usage guidance and behavioral transparency leave gaps around when to use this tool and what side effects may occur.

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%, so both 'enabled' and 'printer' are already documented in the schema. The tool description only echoes the 'all printers' possibility without adding meaningful new parameter detail, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 verb ('enable or disable'), a clear resource ('timelapse recording'), and the scope ('a printer or all printers'). It is clear enough to be understood at a glance, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like set_recording.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_recording or other printer controls. The description only explains what the tool does, not which circumstances warrant choosing it or avoiding it.

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