Update fan profile

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), but the description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: it is a partial update ('only the fields given change'), curve/offset values are replaced wholesale, type changes require new type-specific fields, and channels using the profile update immediately.

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?

Four short sentences, no redundancy, and the core semantic constraint (partial update) is front-loaded immediately after the purpose statement.

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?

Covers the essential behaviors for a 10-parameter nested-object mutation with no output schema: partial update semantics, replacement semantics, type-change dependency, and immediate propagation. It omits only minor details such as discovery of profile identifiers, which the schema partially covers.

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 90%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining cross-parameter semantics: conditional requirements on type changes and the replace-not-merge behavior for curve and offset, which the schema does not state.

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 and resource: 'Change an existing profile.' The word 'existing' implicitly contrasts with create_profile and delete_profile, but the description never names those siblings directly.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'Change an existing profile.' There is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus create_profile or apply_profile, or how to locate the profile (e.g., via list_profiles) before updating it.

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