tool-set

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It doesn't disclose whether this operation requires an active context, whether it switches modes implicitly, whether it has side effects on the current tool state, or what happens if the idname doesn't exist. It only says what it does, not what happens or what constraints exist.

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 clear sentence — concise and front-loaded with the verb 'Switch'. However, it lacks any additional guidance or structure.

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 switches active tooling via idname but the description doesn't cover parameter semantics, expected behavior, or usage context. No output schema, no annotations, and 0% param coverage — the description must compensate but doesn't.

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% – none of the 3 parameters are documented in the schema descriptions (no descriptions at all). The description does not explain what 'idname' format is expected, what 'mode' values are valid, or what 'area' defaulting behavior might be. The description mentions only idname; the other params are undocumented.

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 states 'Switch the active workspace tool by idname', providing a clear verb and resource. However, in the context of ~40 `tool-*`, `app-*`, and `context-*` sibling tools, the term 'workspace tool' is ambiguous — it could mean the tool system, tool selection, or Blender's workspace tools. Sibling names like `tool-active` and `context-mode_set` suggest overlapping functionality that isn't distinguished.

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 the many other tool-related operations (tool-active, tool-settings, context-set_active). Setting an active workspace tool via idname could be confused with tool-setting_set or tool-active, but the description doesn't clarify the relationship or provide exclusion criteria.

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