set_mi_parameter

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It explains value shapes but does not disclose side effects (e.g., persistent save, permissions, reversibility). The mutation behavior is implied but not elaborated.

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?

Two sentences, no redundant information, directly states purpose and value mapping. Very efficient and front-loaded.

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 lack of output schema and the tool's straightforward nature, the description covers the essential usage. However, it could mention that the change takes effect immediately or requires saving.

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 100%, and the description mostly repeats the schema's information about value shapes. It adds little new meaning beyond what is already in the schema fields.

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 it overrides a parameter on a UMaterialInstanceConstant, specifying the three parameter types and value shapes. Distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on mutation rather than inspection or creation.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The context of sibling tools implies it is for overriding parameters, but the description lacks prerequisites (e.g., material instance must already exist) or alternatives.

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