dashy_set_key

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

The destructiveHint annotation already signals destructive behavior. The description adds important context by clarifying that the operation is a complete replacement rather than a merge, which helps the agent understand the exact nature of the destruction.

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 two sentences focusing on the action, resource, and key behavioral nuance. It contains no filler and is well-structured for quick consumption.

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 destructive hint and existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the core operation and acceptable keys. It does miss some context like filename behavior or nonexistent-key handling, but these are not critical for a simple replacement tool.

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?

The schema has no parameter descriptions, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to 'key' by listing the valid top-level keys, but it provides no clarification for 'value' or 'filename', leaving two of three parameters under-specified.

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 action ('Replace') and the resource ('top-level config key') with specific valid keys listed. It also distinguishes the behavior from similar tools by explicitly noting 'not a merge'.

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 this tool is for full key replacement, but it does not explicitly say when to use it over alternatives like dashy_replace_config or dashy_update_section. No direct exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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