printer_speed

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that confirmation is required, implying a guarded mutation, and lists the allowed profiles. It does not state side effects, whether the change applies immediately, or what happens if confirm=false. This is modest disclosure, not full transparency.

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?

Two compact sentences with the core action and allowed values first, followed by the critical requirement. Zero verbose or redundant content.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema the description covers purpose, allowed values, and the key confirmation requirement. It is sufficient for an agent to make a correct call. Missing use-case routing and deeper behavioral details are minor given the tool's simplicitiy.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by enumerating valid values for profile (silent, standard, sport, ludicrous) and specifying that confirm must be true, correcting the schema's false default. Could explicitly name the profile parameter, but the intent is clear.

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+resource: 'Set speed profile', and enumerates the four valid profiles. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like printer_pause, printer_resume, and printer_stop, which are all dfferent actions.

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?

No explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions against alternatives. However, 'Requires confirm=true' gives a clear invocation condition. The use case is implied by the name and verb, but no direct comparison to sibling tools is provided.

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