Set parameter expression / bind / constant

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

Description discloses fail-forward behavior for partial failures and exec-path requirements for reset/unbind modes. Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint false) and nondestructive (destructiveHint false), and the description adds useful context beyond that without contradiction.

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 three sentences with zero wasted words. It front-loads the purpose, then lists modes, and finally addresses edge cases (batch behavior and exec requirement). Every sentence earns its place.

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 complexity of five modes and batch behavior, and the lack of an output schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects. It might omit details like error handling for invalid paths, but overall it provides sufficient context for a 2-parameter tool with full schema coverage.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining each mode's mapping to internal TouchDesigner methods (par.expr, par.bindExpr, par.val, par.reset()) and the fail-forward batch behavior. This enriches parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 specific verb (set) and resource (parameters on a node) and distinguishes it from execute_python_script by noting it avoids the raw-Python escape hatch. It also enumerates five distinct modes, providing a precise scope of functionality.

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 explicitly advises using this tool instead of execute_python_script when TDMCP_RAW_PYTHON is off, and warns about the TDMCP_BRIDGE_ALLOW_EXEC=1 requirement for reset/unbind batches. However, it does not compare to sibling tools like set_parameters_batch or update_td_node_parameters, which could lead to ambiguity.

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