modify_element

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

The description discloses that it modifies instance parameters and returns old and new values for confirmation. However, it does not mention error handling (e.g., non-existent parameters), permissions, or side effects. No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden but is incomplete.

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 relatively concise and front-loaded with the purpose. The docstring-style Args section adds structure but could be more streamlined.

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 has a nested parameters object and no output schema, the description partially explains the return value. It lacks details on formatting of old/new values and does not cover edge cases like modifying read-only parameters. Siblings include many similar tools, but the description does not fully differentiate context.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining element_id and parameters as a dictionary with example. However, it does not specify valid parameter types, case sensitivity, or constraints, leaving some ambiguity.

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 'Modify parameter values on a Revit element' and 'Changes one or more instance parameters', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'set_parameter' and 'delete_elements' by focusing on modifying multiple instance parameters.

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 modifying instance parameters but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_parameter' or 'transform_elements'. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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