Backup settings

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

With annotations showing readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, the description adds important behavioral context: 'Nothing on the device changes' and 'local JSON file' clarify the side-effect profile (writes a file locally but does not alter the device). It also ties into restore_settings for reversibility, which adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 sentences with zero fluff. The first sentence front-loads the purpose and scope; the second delivers usage guidance and the relation to restore_settings. Every clause earns its place.

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 a full schema and an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what is saved, where it goes, side effects, and when to use it. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%, so parameters are already fully documented. The description adds no extra semantics beyond what the schema provides; the 'label' is correctly called out in the schema as an optional file-name tag. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the load.

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 ('Save'), the resource (complete controller configuration), and the output (local JSON file), enumerating exactly what is included. It also differentiates from siblings by mentioning 'restore_settings undoes changes' and the directive to run before set_* calls, so an agent can distinguish it from other tools without opening schemas.

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?

'Do this before any set_* call' is an explicit when-to-use directive, and 'restore_settings undoes changes' implies the alternative for reverting changes. This is clear, actionable guidance that leaves no ambiguity about when the tool should be invoked.

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