outliner-visibility_set

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It mentions the action (set restrictions) but does not disclose effects on referencing scenes, whether changes propagate to linked duplicates, or if there are side effects on dependencies. Lacks transparency for a mutation tool.

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 one concise sentence that accurately summarizes the tool's function. It is not padded with unnecessary details. However, it could benefit from a bit more context, which might be added without becoming verbose.

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 tool's simplicity (4 boolean parameters) and no output schema, the description is adequate for basic usage. However, the lack of annotations and absence of usage guidance reduce completeness. For a tool that modifies object state, more behavioral and contextual information would be expected.

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 should compensate. However, the parameter titles (Renderable, Visible in viewport, Selectable) are self-explanatory. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Since parameters are simple booleans, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 purpose: to set object-level visibility and selection restrictions (viewport, render, selectable). While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings, the name and description make it distinct from collection-level or view layer tools.

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?

The description implies usage: when you need to adjust visibility for a specific object rather than a collection or view layer. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like outliner-collection_visibility_set. This is a clear gap.

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