Read or change project generation settings

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

Beyond annotations, description adds key behaviors: changes are free (cost impact), settings persist across turns, and suggests re-reading after switching projects. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Four sentences with clear front-loading of purpose, followed by persistence and cost example. No redundant information; each 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 6 parameters and no output schema, description covers purpose, persistence, cost, and usage hint. It lacks guidance on when to use get vs set, but schema provides action parameter.

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 covers 83% of parameters with descriptions; description adds value by explaining persistence and cost implications but does not detail each parameter 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 tool reads or changes project generation settings, with specific items: model tier, aspect ratio, outputs per prompt. Differentiates from sibling tools by focusing on project globals rather than generation or media management.

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?

Provides context that settings are project globals and persist across chat turns, aiding when to use. However, it does not explicitly exclude other tools or give alternatives, leaving some ambiguity.

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