set_streaming_level_visible

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: it runs inside an undo transaction, marks the map dirty without saving, errors on an unknown level, and warns that is_level_visible may not change because the viewport follows a separate editor-visibility flag. The request-not-immediate nuance usefully qualifies the destructiveHint=true annotation without contradicting it.

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?

Information-dense and front-loaded with the core semantics, then alternatives, then return shape. It is longer than most definitions but nearly every clause carries non-obvious behavior; slight compression of the sibling list would help.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, it compensates by enumerating the returned fields inline, discloses side effects (dirty map, undo transaction, error on unknown level), and routes to alternatives. Nothing material is missing.

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 100%, so the description's main duty is extra meaning. It explains that 'applied' compares the flag with 'visible', which helps interpret the result. However, it claims the level can be found by 'package path or short name' while the schema exposes only level_package_path, which mildly muddies which identifier to supply.

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 (set) plus the exact resource and underlying property (ULevelStreaming bShouldBeVisible on a streaming sub-level), including lookup key. An agent can distinguish it from set_streaming_level_loaded and get_streaming_levels without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly scopes when to use it versus siblings: names set_streaming_level_loaded for loading, get_streaming_levels for current state, and add_streaming_level for adding, and clarifies it is a request rather than an immediate change. This is genuine routing guidance.

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