set_geometry_node_input

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

No annotations are present, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose safety traits (e.g., overwrites values, requires existing modifier) or handling of invalid types beyond saying 'type depends on input'.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, then clear Args and Returns sections. No redundant information; every sentence 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?

Covers purpose, parameters, and return value. Good for a simple setter tool. Could mention prerequisites (e.g., modifier must exist) but that is somewhat implicit.

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, description explains each parameter meaningfully. For 'value', it adds that type depends on input (float, int, vector, etc.), which compensates for schema gaps. However, lacks examples or constraints.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'set' and the resource 'input value on a geometry nodes modifier'. Distinguishes from siblings like 'list_geometry_node_inputs' or 'connect_geometry_nodes'.

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?

Implied usage: when you need to change a specific input on a GN modifier. No explicit when-not or alternatives provided, but context is clear.

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