set_pipe_roughness

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the parameter meanings (e.g., roughness units) but does not mention side effects, permissions, constraints, or whether changes are reversible. Moderate transparency.

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 succinct, with a one-line purpose and clear argument definitions. It is front-loaded and free of fluff, though it could benefit from slightly more structured formatting.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 required params, output schema exists), the description covers purpose and parameter semantics adequately. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral details, leaving some gaps for an agent to decide when to invoke this tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaningful details: 'network_id: Session id', 'pipe_id: Pipe name/ID', 'roughness: Hazen-Williams C factor (or Darcy-Weisbach roughness height).' This significantly compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 'Set the roughness coefficient of a pipe,' specifying the verb 'Set' and the resource 'roughness coefficient of a pipe.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_pipe_diameter, set_pipe_status, etc.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or when-not-to-use scenarios. The context is implied by the name but not elaborated.

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