Set full firmware config

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, and idempotent=false. The description adds useful timing context beyond those annotations: the change applies immediately to the app store and affects the next burn. It doesn't explain what happens to config keys absent from the supplied object, which is the main remaining ambiguity for a full-replace mutation.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action. The 'MUTATING — writes to the app's firmware config' sentence largely restates the annotations, so it earns its place less than the timing sentence does.

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?

With one required parameter, full schema coverage, annotations covering the safety profile, and no output schema, the description supplies what an agent needs: what is replaced, the underlying call, and when the effect lands. Only the partial-vs-full-replace failure mode is left unaddressed.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter already documents itself as a 'Full firmware config object (mirror of firmware_config_get).' The description repeats that framing rather than adding format, validation, or shape details beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Replace the whole firmware config.' The word 'whole' implicitly distinguishes it from the partial-edit sibling firmware_config_edit, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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 conveys that this is a full replacement that applies immediately to the app store and the next burn, which implies when it's appropriate. It never explicitly says when to prefer firmware_config_edit, firmware_config_reset, or load_template instead, so the routing decision is left to inference.

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