gaea_set_build_output

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 implies mutation with 'Set' and reveals broad scope with 'every', but it does not disclose the dryRun default, whether existing destinations are overwritten, persistency effects, or any safety considerations. This is insufficient for a mutating operation.

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 with no wasted words. It communicates the action and the affected resource immediately and could not be meaningfully shorter.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and zero parameter documentation, the description alone is not enough for safe invocation. It omits dryRun semantics, how the graph is referenced, return behavior, and how this relates to building or listing outputs, leaving important context 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter documentation, but it does not. It only broadly implies that graph is the target and outputDir is the destination; dryRun's purpose and default behavior, expected path formats, and relationship between properties are all left undocmented.

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 a specific verb ('Set') and a precise resource ('every BuildDefinition Destination') in a Gaea graph. It distinguishes from sibling setter tools by targeting build output rather than input heightmaps or variables, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as gaea_set_variable, gaea_set_input_heightmap, or gaea_run_build. The description does not mention prerequisites, workflow placement, or situations where the tool should be avoided.

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