Profilwechsel vorbereiten

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context: the tool can either write the config or show a preview depending on the `write` parameter, and it resolves a full mcp-config file. This goes beyond the raw annotations without contradicting them.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Bereitet einen Profilwechsel vor') and then specifies the key artifact and modes (erzeugt oder als Vorschau). No wasted words.

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?

Given the rich input schema and annotations, the description is sufficient to infer the tool's main behavior. It does not explain return/output format for the preview mode, but this is less critical because no output schema is expected and the preview concept is reasonably transparent.

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?

All five parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to compensate. The description's mention of a 'resolved --mcp-config file' reinforces the role of `profileName` and `profileRoot`, but it does not add much beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: preparing a profile switch by generating or previewing a resolved --mcp-config file. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like `controlcenter_resolve_profile`, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 implies the tool is used when preparing a profile switch, and the `write` flag makes the preview/write distinction clear. However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with the many sibling profile-management tools, such as `suggest_profile` or `audit_profile`.

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