aia_set_blocks

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

With no annotations, the description carries meaningful behavioral load: 'Replace' signals destructive overwrite, and the XML-root rule warns of a top-level validation constraint. However, it does not describe success/failure behavior, whether the screen must exist first, or what side effects occur on the .aia file.

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?

Two short sentences deliver both the operation and the key constraint without wasted words. The action and main validation rule are front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

For a destructive, three-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and input contract but omits success/failure semantics, whether the screen or file must already exist, and what the agent should expect after the call. It is adequate but not fully self-contained.

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 only 33%, but the description adds substantial meaning to blocks_xml by explaining that it is a .bky blocks XML and must have an <xml> root element. It implicitly ties screen_name to the target screen, though it does not explicitly describe the parameter.

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 a concrete verb 'Replace' and a specific resource: a screen's blocks XML (.bky). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like aia_get_screen or aia_set_property, which target other concerns.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as aia_get_screen or aia_set_property. The 'Must' sentence states an input validation requirement, not a usage condition or context.

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