set_properties

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates mutation ('Set') and the empty string behavior, but does not disclose permissions needed, whether changes are destructive (overwriting existing metadata), or the response structure. Output schema exists but is not referenced.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. Front-loaded with the primary action. 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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is too brief for a 5-parameter tool with no schema descriptions. It does not explain the scope of 'core', whether all properties must be set together, or the role of 'document_handle'.

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%, yet the description adds only generic context ('core document properties') and the empty string convention. Parameter names ('title', 'creator', etc.) are somewhat self-explanatory, but the 'document_handle' parameter is ambiguous and unexplained.

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 core document properties', which specifies the verb and resource. It implies standard metadata properties, distinguishing from sibling 'set_custom_property' for custom properties. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other set tools.

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?

Provides one usage hint: 'Empty string = unchanged,' which tells agents how to leave a property unchanged. But it offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_custom_property' or 'get_properties', nor prerequisites like requiring an open document.

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