Set Document Property

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

Annotations indicate the tool is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive. The description adds that the value is validated against the property type, which is helpful. However, it omits details like whether the property must already exist or if it can be created on-the-fly (given openWorldHint=true, unclear). No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is concise with no unnecessary information, but it could potentially be split for readability.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain return behavior or side effects. It does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., success confirmation) or failure conditions (e.g., property not found). For a write operation with 4 parameters, this is insufficient.

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 50% (2 of 4 parameters have descriptions). The main description adds validation context for the 'value' parameter. However, it does not provide additional meaning for 'docId' and 'workspaceId' beyond the schema's type constraints. The description partially compensates but not fully.

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 sets a document's custom property value, identified by id or name. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'clear_doc_property' (removes property) and 'create_custom_property' (creates a property definition).

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?

The description implies usage for setting a custom property value but does not explicitly state when to use or when not to, nor does it mention alternatives like using 'clear_doc_property' to remove a property. Guidance is minimal.

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