set-actor-art

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that setting token art is default (applyToToken true), the portrait must be still, and token can accept video. It also mentions GM-only permission. No contradictions or hidden side effects are omitted.

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 three sentences, each with a clear purpose: core action, nuance about animation, and permission. No redundant words; it is front-loaded with the primary action.

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 4 parameters (2 required), 100% schema coverage, and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the key behavioral aspects, use case, and permission. It could mention the effect on actor.img and token.texture explicitly, but the schema covers parameter details.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the still vs animated distinction and the pattern (JB2A-effect), which goes beyond the schema descriptions. It ties the parameters together meaningfully.

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 tool sets an actor's portrait and, by default, the prototype token art. It specifies the verb 'set', the resource 'actor's portrait image' and 'prototype token art', and the constraint of using a Data-relative path. It also distinguishes between still portrait and animated token, providing unique purpose clarity.

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 explicitly states 'GM-only', indicating who can use it. It explains when to use tokenImagePath (for animated token while keeping still portrait), implying when not to use it. However, it does not directly compare to sibling tools like 'update-actor' which might also modify images, but the specialized nature is clear.

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