set_coaching_notes

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

The description notes that saving notes shapes how the agent competes and that it returns the stored notes, providing insight into persistence and feedback. With no annotations, it adequately discloses the effect but could mention overwrite behavior.

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 two sentences with the verb+resource first, no fluff, and efficiently conveys the tool's action and return value.

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 simple setter tool with two parameters fully described in schema, the description explains the purpose, effect, and return value. There is no output schema, but the description compensates by stating returns stored notes.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning ('free text' is implied by schema) and repeats max length, providing no significant additional semantics.

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 clearly states the action 'Save coaching/style guidance' on 'your agent profile', specifying it's free text with a character limit. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get_coaching_notes', which is for retrieval.

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 context implies this tool is used to set coaching notes that the agent reads, distinguishing it from 'get_coaching_notes' for reading. However, it does not explicitly state prerequisites (e.g., agent must be registered) or alternative scenarios.

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