shader_set_node_param

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

Annotations provide only a title, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. 'Set' indicates mutation, but the description does not cover side effects, failure modes, required permissions, or what happens when the material, node, or parameter is invalid. This is a meaningful gap for a mutating tool.

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 short sentences with no filler; the core operation is front-loaded and the special-case guidance follows immediately. Every word 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?

With no output schema and no behavioral annotations, the agent is left without information about valid param names, value serialization, or prerequisite node and material states. The description is adequate for orientation but not for reliable invocation across shader node types.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it only clarifies one parameter case: TEX_IMAGE images. It does not define the accepted format of 'param', the general meaning of 'value', or how material_name and node_name are resolved. The image note is useful but insufficient.

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 opens with a specific action and resource: 'Set param on shader node.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like geometry_nodes_set_param, which operate on geometry nodes rather than shaders. It does not enumerate which parameters are settable, but the core purpose 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?

The first sentence gives clear context that this tool is for shader node parameters, and the second provides concrete guidance for a common special case: 'For TEX_IMAGE image, pass image name or filepath.' It lacks explicit when-not-to-use statements or named alternatives, but no sibling directly competes with this tool.

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