Set height-range config

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

The description discloses two important behavioral traits beyond the annotations: idempotent update ('Same exact range again = update') and clearing behavior ('clear=True removes all ranges'). This adds value over the sparse readOnlyHint/destructiveHint flags, though it does not cover all edge cases like overlapping ranges.

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 sentences, with the main purpose front-loaded and additional behavioral details following. It is concise, every sentence adds information, and it avoids unnecessary repetition of schema data.

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?

The tool has five parameters and no output schema, yet the description only covers the core range-setting behavior. It omits important context such as what happens with null min/max, how overlapping ranges are handled, and what the return value is. This is adequate for a simple setter but leaves gaps for nuanced usage.

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 must compensate, but it only provides a single example mapping to parameters (min_z, max_z, layer_height) and explicitly mentions clear. object_id is not explained, and there is no systematic parameter breakdown, leaving some guessing for the agent.

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 the tool's function: 'Set a per-height-band layer height on an object' with a concrete example ('0-5mm at 0.1mm'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_layer_height, which likely sets a uniform height, by specifying the per-band scope.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_config or set_layer_height. The description implies usage for variable layer heights and provides behavioral notes about update/clear, but lacks direct 'use this when' or 'instead of' instructions.

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