set_default_store

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the store is 'remembered' for later searches; it doesn't say whether an existing default is overwritten, whether authentication is required, or what observable effect occurs beyond future searches.

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 two short sentences with the core purpose first and the parameter guidance second. There is no filler or repetition of the schema beyond what adds value.

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?

For a simple one-parameter setter with an output schema, the description covers the input provenance and the intended effect on future searches. It could state the overwrite behavior and link to get_default_store, but the tool is simple enough that the current text is mostly complete.

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 description coverage, the description compensates by naming the exact source of location_id (find_stores) and giving a concrete example format ('62000115'). This is sufficient for the single required parameter.

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 an active verb ('Remember') and clearly scopes the resource to a store for later product searches, which matches the setter name. It doesn't explicitly contrast with get_default_store, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 intended usage is implied: call it before product searches to establish a default store, using a location_id from find_stores. It doesn't state when not to use it or why get_default_store/search_products might be alternatives, so the guidance is only implicit.

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