set_about

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond the purpose statement — it does not warn that existing 'Infos' text is overwritten, nor mention auth/account requirements, so it contributes no behavioral context the annotations don't already carry.

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?

A single short sentence with zero filler and the operation front-loaded. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the cause of the missing usage and parameter detail noted elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a destructive write tool the description never states that the previous 'Infos' text is replaced or which account is affected, leaving meaningful gaps for an agent choosing and invoking it.

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 only 50%: 'about' is documented in the schema, but the 'account' parameter has no description in either the schema or the tool description. For a multi-account context (list_accounts is a sibling), the description should clarify which account the change targets, and it does not.

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 and resource in French — 'Change le texte « Infos » de mon profil' — which unambiguously identifies a profile 'About' field mutation. It is clear on its own, though it does not name or contrast itself with any sibling (e.g. get_profile, which reads rather than writes the same data).

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 tool versus alternatives such as get_profile or privacy_settings, nor any stated preconditions (e.g. needing a paired session). The single sentence only restates the operation, leaving the agent to infer when it applies.

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