cyd_time_set

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only restates the core mutation ('synchronize the clock'). It does not disclose whether this overwrites the current time, requires permissions, is reversible, or what the tool returns on success/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 core sentence is compact, but it is prefixed by cryptic fragments ('Action, L1') that do not earn their place. The description is short yet not optimally 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 one-parameter action with no output schema, the description covers the essential operation and input. It is minimally adequate, though an agent would still lack information about the expected result or side effects.

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 schema provides only a name and minimum for the single integer parameter, but the description clarifies that the parameter represents a Unix epoch, which is essential semantic meaning. It could add units/range clarity, but 'Unix epoch' is a recognizable standard.

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 ('Synchronize') and resource ('CYD clock'), and specifies the input source ('Unix epoch'), making the tool's function clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, but no sibling covers clock/time operations, so the lack of explicit differentiation is not a real issue.

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?

There is no guidance about when to call this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives. 'Machine-specific (cyd)' only hints at scope and does not help an agent decide between this and other cyd_* tools.

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