set_chat_system_prompt

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'PRO+ plan' as a constraint, but does not explain effects such as overwriting behavior, required permissions, or return values. This is insufficient 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 extremely concise with two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and plan requirement. Every word earns its place, though it is under-specified.

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 lack of schema definitions, annotations, and output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to invoke the tool, what parameters to provide, or what the outcome will be. This is inadequate for a setter tool.

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 input schema is empty with additionalProperties true, providing no parameter definitions. The description does not mention any expected parameters (e.g., the prompt text), so it fails to add meaning beyond the schema. Despite zero explicit parameters, the tool implicitly requires input, and the description offers no guidance.

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 verb 'set' and the resource 'AI chat system prompt', distinguishing it from sibling get_chat_system_prompt. It is specific and unambiguous about 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool or how it differs from alternatives. It only states the action, with no mention of contexts, preconditions, or exclusions.

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