save_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that Frigate validates the YAML before persisting, which is a key behavioral trait, and also mentions the optional restart. It does not mention what happens on validation failure or the impact of a restart, but the disclosed info is meaningful and non-obvious.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the primary purpose in the first sentence and adding critical constraints (admin, validation) in the second. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 tool's mutation nature and absent annotations, the description adequately covers admin requirements and validation. An output schema exists, so return values are capturable. It lacks explicit warning about restart side effects, but the core context is complete enough.

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 descriptions for both parameters. The description lightly echoes this by referencing 'new Frigate YAML config' and 'optionally restart,' but adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, so a 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 verb 'Save' clearly identifies the action, and the resource is specified as 'a new Frigate YAML config.' It also distinguishes from sibling tools like restart_frigate (which only restarts) and get_config (which reads).

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 explicitly states 'Admin only,' which is a usage constraint, and the optional restart behavior gives context on when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, leaving some ambiguity.

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