baker_set_texture_set

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, giving the agent a safety profile. The description adds the useful constraint that it operates on exactly one texture set, but does not disclose side effects on already-enabled sets or what the response contains.

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?

Single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The parenthetical adds ambiguity rather than clarity, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

A mutation tool with 5 parameters at 0% schema coverage and no output description in the text; the 'baker' target and the meaning of tileMode remain unexplained. An output schema exists, but the input-side gaps are substantial for a state-changing 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It hints that index accepts either a numeric index or a name, and that width/height control sizing while enabled toggles state, which maps to several params. However, the 'baker' parameter is never explained and 'tileMode 1' is unexplained jargon.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Enable and size one texture set'. Distinguishes it from siblings like baker_set_maps or baker_set_settings. The '(tileMode 1)' parenthetical is opaque, but the core action is legible.

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 on when to use this versus baker_set_maps or baker_set_settings, no prerequisites, and no mention of what happens if the referenced texture set does not exist. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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