get_power_profile

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

The description says 'Get' the power profile, indicating a read-only lookup, while the annotations set readOnlyHint=false, implying the tool might modify state. This is a direct contradiction, and the description does not disclose any side effects or clarify the discrepancy.

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 one concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the resource name and includes useful possible values in a compact parenthetical.

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 zero-parameter getter with no output schema, naming the returned property and its possible values is nearly sufficient. However, the readOnlyHint=false annotation conflicts with the 'Get' semantics, so an agent cannot fully trust the safety profile from the description alone.

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 has zero properties)Skip to the description need not document parameter semantics. The parenthetical in the description refers to possible return values, not parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%, satisfying the no-parameter baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('current power profile'), and it enumerates the possible values (performance, balanced, power-saver). This makes the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinguishes it from the sibling set_power_profile.

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 implies usage when an agent needs the current power profile, but it gives no explicit when/when-not guidance and does not mention set_power_profile as the alternative for changing it. The context is inferred rather than stated.

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