spoolman_set_setting

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full behavioral transparency burden, but it merely states 'Set a Spoolman configuration value by key.' It does not disclose whether changes are persisted, if a restart is required, what happens when the key doesn't exist, or if any permissions are needed. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and resource. Every word earns its place, and it is immediately scannable.

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 is a setter with no output schema and no annotations, and the description gives no indication of how to discover valid keys (e.g., pointing to spoolman_get_all_settings) or what the consequences of setting a value might be. For a configuration mutation, the context is inadequate.

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?

The schema already documents both parameters ('The setting key' and 'The new value to set') with 100% coverage. The description's phrase 'by key' and 'configuration value' aligns with the schema but adds no additional semantic information. This matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('Set') and resource ('Spoolman configuration value'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like spoolman_get_setting. The phrase 'by key' further clarifies the main input parameter. It fully captures the tool's function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as spoolman_get_all_settings or spoolman_get_setting. It does not mention prerequisites like looking up valid keys, or any context about which settings can be modified. This leaves the agent with insufficient routing information.

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