set_substrate_slab_scalar

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

Annotations already carry the safety profile (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=true). The description adds mechanism and substrate-state context, but with destructiveHint=true it never explains what happens if the pin already has a connection or whether existing links are overwritten, which is the key behavioral gap for this mutation.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then mechanism, prerequisite, and return shape in a tight sequence. The explicit Returns block is slightly verbose but earns its place given there is no output schema.

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, the description compensates by enumerating the return fields, and it states the required predecessor tool. A note on overwrite behavior for an already-connected pin would make it fully complete, but it is sufficient to call the tool correctly.

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 all three parameters are already documented. The description restates pin examples (Roughness, F0, DiffuseAlbedo, Anisotropy) that largely duplicate the schema's own pin_name example, adding no new syntax or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (drive) and resource (Substrate Slab BSDF scalar pin), and explains the mechanism (a Constant node connected to the pin). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like create_substrate_slab_node and connect_substrate_slab_to_material.

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?

Declares the prerequisite ("Requires create_substrate_slab_node first") and clarifies it works regardless of whether Substrate is enabled. It lists example pin names but does not name alternative tools or when-not-to-use conditions, so it falls short of a 5.

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