zadig_service_set_variable

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the important dry_run=true default, which signals a safe execution mode, but it fails to explain the related 'confirm' parameter, the actual mutation behavior when dry_run is false, or any side effects. Some value is added, but significant behavioral gaps remain.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and includes a key safety default. It earns a 4 because it is concise without wasting words, though it omits necessary detail.

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 10 parameters, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, this description is severely under-specified. It does not explain the relationship between dry_run and confirm, the meaning of value_type or production, or how project_key and service_name relate. The output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the description still leaves an agent unable to correctly invoke this tool with confidence.

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 0% and the description does not compensate. It only mentions 'dry_run=true', which duplicates the schema default and adds no meaning about what the parameter does. The required parameters service_name, key, and value, along with optional parameters like production, value_type, and confirm, are entirely unexplained.

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 uses a specific verb ('Upsert') and resource ('a single service variable'), making the tool's function immediately clear. The word 'single' distinguishes it from the sibling 'zadig_service_update_variables', which implies a batch operation.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like zadig_service_update_variables or zadig_service_set_image. The 'single variable' wording implies a narrow use case, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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