set_text_style

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

With no annotations, the description discloses partial application behavior ('Only the provided fields are applied') and automatic font loading, offering meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words.

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 tool with 11 params and nested objects, the description covers the key behavioral aspects (partial update, font loading) despite no output schema; could mention error conditions but overall adequate.

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 100% of parameters; the description reiterates the lineHeight/letterSpacing structure and the AUTO unit special case, adding no significant new semantics 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 uses a specific verb ('Set') with a resource ('TEXT node') and scope ('detailed typography'), clearly differentiating it from sibling tools like set_text_content (content) and other styling tools.

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?

It implies use for applying multiple typography attributes in one call and clarifies partial updates, but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria.

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