Set power profile (verified)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the responsibility. It discloses persistence ('remember') and verification ('verify the active profile afterwards'), which are valuable. However, it does not mention potential side effects, error conditions, or what happens if a profile is unsupported on the current hardware.

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, well-structured sentence with no filler. The action, persistence, and verification are all stated efficiently, and the information is 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 setter with a clear schema and no output schema, the description covers the core action, persistence, and verification. It lacks any mention of return values, error handling, or edge cases (e.g., unsupported profile on a given source). Given the tool's low complexity, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps 'detected, AC, or battery' to the source parameter but does not explain the 'profile' enum values (power-saver, balanced, performance) or their implications. The agent gets enum names but no behavioral or performance context.

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 clear verb ('Set') and resource ('power profile') with the nuance of 'remember' and 'verify'. It distinguishes from the sibling powerprofiles_list by focusing on setting, though it doesn't explicitely name the sibling.

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?

It implies usage for setting profiles across power sources but does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools. The context of 'detected, AC, or battery' gives some situational guidance, but no explicit exclusions or comparator tools.

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