set_component_property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals specific behaviors for INSTANCE_SWAP (key vs node ID, linking child instance). It does not disclose mutation consequences or auth requirements but goes beyond the schema.

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 with no redundant words. The first sentence covers the broad use, the second adds critical detail for a special case. Extremely efficient.

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?

Covers all 5 parameters implicitly or explicitly, addressing the special INSTANCE_SWAP case. Missing details on default behavior for other types and what happens if property already exists, but given no output schema and high schema coverage, this is reasonably complete.

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%, baseline is 3. The description adds nuance beyond the schema, such as clarifying that defaultValue for INSTANCE_SWAP is a component key and that targetChildId sets mainComponent automatically.

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 the action ('Add') and the resource ('Component Property') along with the specific types (Boolean, Text, Instance Swap, Variant). It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_component_property_references by focusing on adding a property rather than referencing.

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 explicit guidance for INSTANCE_SWAP type, specifying that defaultValue must be a key and targetChildId is required. However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or compare with alternatives for other property types.

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