outliner.visibility_set

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether changes are destructive, require permissions, or affect undo history. The description simply states the action without side-effect warnings.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is too brief. It could be structured to list parameters or provide a usage example. It is adequate but not well-structured for an AI agent.

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 complexity (simple setters) and lack of output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, default behavior, or how multiple properties interact. An agent would need additional context to use it correctly.

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% (no parameter descriptions in schema). The description mentions 'viewport/render/selectability restrictions', which maps to three boolean parameters, but does not explain the 'object' parameter or clarify the exact meaning of each boolean. Since the schema provides only titles, the description adds minimal semantic value beyond identifying the parameters.

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?

Description clearly states it sets object-level viewport, render, and selectability restrictions. It uses specific verbs and resources ('Set object-level... restrictions'), and distinguishes itself from sibling outliner tools like outliner.object_link or outliner.collection_visibility_set.

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 tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or suggest alternative tools. The usage context is entirely implicit.

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