load_profile_by_id

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'activate' without explaining side effects, permissions, reversibility, or what happens on success or failure. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely changes the current state of the machine.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and key constraint. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or unnecessary information.

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?

Although the tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, the description lacks critical context for an agent: what 'activate' means operationally, whether it is safe or destructive, and how it differs from 'load_profile'. This incompleteness could lead to incorrect invocation.

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 already provides full coverage (100%) with a clear description of the single parameter 'profile_id' as the UUID to activate. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'activates an existing profile' by its UUID, providing a specific verb and resource. It also adds the constraint that the profile must already be saved, which clarifies its scope and distinguishes it from creation tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'load_profile', so it falls short of a perfect score.

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 usage by stating the profile must already be saved on the machine, which tells the agent when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when not to use it, leaving the guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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