set_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It indicates a mutation operation but lacks details on side effects, required permissions, persistence, or error scenarios. For a configuration-setting tool, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise at two lines, with a clear Args section. While efficient, it could benefit from slightly more structure or a brief note on behavior.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, no enums, output schema exists), the description covers basic purpose and parameters. However, missing behavioral context like authentication requirements and side effects reduces completeness.

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 parameter descriptions add minimal context beyond the raw schema, providing an example for 'key' but no constraints or allowed values. With 0% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but remains vague.

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 ('Set') and resource ('Multipass configuration setting'), and the parameter examples further clarify the tool's purpose. It effectively distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_config', which retrieves configuration.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The presence of sibling tools like 'get_config' implies complementary usage, but the description does not provide context for when setting is appropriate or any prerequisites.

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