Set Workspace Node

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), the description details the read-merge-write process, automatic handling of column linkages, passthrough transforms, API field injection, and metadata cleaning. It explains the return structure, adding significant behavioral context.

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?

The description is well-structured with a summary, behavior paragraph, bullet-point args, return info, and usage warnings. It is front-loaded but slightly lengthy; every sentence adds value, so it earns a 4.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (nested objects, 3 required params), the description covers the update process, automatic behaviors, and return fields. It could mention relationship with get_workspace_node for reading state, but overall it's complete enough for an agent to use 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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing typical body fields (name, description, nodeType, config, metadata.columns) and warns against including overrideSQL (auto-preserved). This aids understanding beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 tool updates a workspace node's full body with merge semantics. It identifies itself as the 'primary mutation tool' and lists automatic behaviors, distinguishing from tools like apply_join_condition. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'update_workspace_node', which may cause confusion.

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?

Explicit guidance is given on when to use (for workspace node updates) and when not to use (avoid setting overrideSQL or metadata.sourceMapping, use apply_join_condition/convert_join_to_aggregation for joins/aggregations). It lacks explicit mention of when to prefer alternative mutation tools like update_workspace_node.

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