set_mpci_scalar_parameter_value

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false). The description adds real value by documenting the readback_value/readback_ok fields, revealing that the write is verified on return, but it does not say what state gets overwritten, how to revert the override, or whether permissions are required.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence stating the action, followed by a compact return-shape line. Nothing is padded, though the Returns block could have been folded more tightly.

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 fully-schema-documented mutation with annotations covering safety and a description that documents the return payload, an agent has enough to call it correctly. The missing piece is usage routing against the vector/clear-override siblings, which is a real but secondary 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents value, parameter_name, collection_path, and world_label. The description's phrase 'world's MPCI' loosely gestures at world_label, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct.

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: 'Override a scalar parameter value on the world's MPCI'. The 'scalar' qualifier implicitly separates it from the vector sibling (set_mpci_vector_parameter_value). However, it never names an alternative explicitly, so sibling differentiation relies on the agent's inference.

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 guidance on when to use this versus set_collection_param_default, clear_mpci_parameter_overrides, or the vector variant. No prerequisites, no note on whether an override supersedes an existing default. The agent is left to infer everything about selection.

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