swm_profile

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 does state that this is a write operation and that it 'requires confirmation', which is useful. However, it does not disclose what the confirmation flow entails, what side effects occur, whether changes are reversible, or what happens on success or failure.

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 short sentence that front-loads the key facts: it configures a switch profile, it is a write operation, and it requires confirmation. It is concise and free of filler, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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 write tool with no annotations, no output schema, and four undocumented parameters, the description is incomplete. An agent cannot determine what to pass in 'param', how to obtain the confirmation token, or what the tool returns. The confirmation requirement is mentioned but not explained, leaving a critical gap for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the four undocumented parameters. It does not explain what 'param' means, what values it accepts, or how user_code, confirm_token, and confirmation_id relate to the confirmation requirement. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema's bare names.

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 specific verb and resource ('Configure switch profile') and flags it as a write operation, which distinguishes it from the many read-only 'show' siblings. However, it does not explain what a switch profile is or what configuration aspects are covered, leaving the tool's exact purpose somewhat vague.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among siblings there are swm_show, swm_get, swm_enable, swm_disable, swm_post, swm_group, swm_detail, swm_maintain, swm_search, swm_db, swm_alert, swm_log, swm_snmp, swm_tr069, but the description does not mention any of them or any conditions for choosing this one.

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