Set parameter expression / bind / constant

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

The description adds crucial behavioral details beyond annotations: fail-forward behavior where per-item failures accumulate as warnings, ensuring partial batch returns useful results. No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false, openWorldHint: true).

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?

Three front-loaded sentences: purpose, modes, and batch behavior with usage guidance. No redundant information; 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 medium tool complexity (2 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, modes, fail-forward behavior, and when to use. It does not mention prerequisites like node existence, but this is acceptable.

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 value by explaining the three modes and providing example expressions (e.g., 'me.time.seconds'), clarifying the usage of expr vs value fields 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?

Description clearly states the action (set parameters) and resource (on a node) with three specific modes (expression, bind, constant). It distinguishes from sibling tools like execute_python_script and set_parameters_batch by mentioning the raw-Python escape hatch avoidance.

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?

Explicitly advises using this tool instead of execute_python_script when TDMCP_RAW_PYTHON is off, providing clear context. However, it does not mention other alternatives or explicitly state when not to use it.

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