set_speed

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only labels the levels. It does not disclose whether the change affects a currently running print, whether it is persistent, or any side effects of switching profiles during a job.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the value mapping immediately after; every word earns its place with zero waste.

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 two-parameter setter with no output schema, the value mapping makes it largely callable. However, with no annotations and no behavioral notes, an agent still lacks context on the effect on running prints and persistence, leaving a real gap.

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 only 50%, but the description compensates strongly by enumerating all four meanings of the required 'level' parameter (silent/standard/sport/ludicrous), which the schema itself does not document. The optional printer_id is covered by the schema. The description adds genuine value beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ('Print speed profile') and enumerates what each level value means, so the agent knows exactly what the tool sets. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like set_temperature or set_light, but the target resource is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisite context (e.g., whether it applies to an active print or persists across jobs). The agent is left to infer all usage conditions.

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