param_description

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

The description discloses the read-write behavior (get or set) and explains the conditional logic based on the 'text' parameter. It also states the return values: description or confirmation. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so adequately, though it omits potential side effects or prerequisites.

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 concise and structured with clear sections (Args, Returns). Every sentence serves a purpose, and there is no redundant information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the two modes of operation, required parameters, and expected returns. Minor omissions like prerequisites (e.g., loaded model) or examples are acceptable for a tool of this scope.

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?

Although the input schema has 0% description coverage, the description adds meaning for each parameter: 'name' is the parameter name, 'text' is the new description (or None to get current), and 'model_name' is the model name with a default. This adds value beyond the schema's bare parameter names.

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 explicitly states the tool gets or sets a parameter's description, using specific verbs and resource (parameter description). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like param_get (gets parameter values) and param_set (sets parameter values), which are about parameter values rather than descriptions.

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 clearly indicates when to use each mode: when text is None, it retrieves the description; when text is provided, it updates it. While it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, the behavior is self-explanatory given the context of sibling tools.

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