update_system_console

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not mention side effects, the effect of apply_immediately, or runtime impact.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise, though its brevity contributes to vagueness penalized in other dimensions.

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 5 optional parameters, annotations, and output schema, the description is minimal but not entirely inadequate. It lacks usage context and an overview of what console settings entail, but the schema covers parameter details.

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%, with each parameter described (e.g., serialspeed, primaryconsole). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, but the schema fully documents the parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Update' and identifies the resource 'system console settings', clearly indicating the tool's action. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_system_console or update_system_hostname, but the update action is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about prerequisites, whether to retrieve current settings first, or how it relates to other update_* tools.

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