Set Extra Data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only implies mutation through the verb 'Set'. It does not say whether changes are persistent, whether existing XDAT values are overwritten, what permissions or file state are required, or what happens on an invalid parameter number.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler and no repetition of the schema. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the missing behavioral and usage detail rather than a deliberate summary of it.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no usage guidance, the description is insufficient: an agent cannot tell what state is required, what gets overwritten, or what result to expect. The schema covers parameters, but the behavioral context is essentially absent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents surfaceNumber and the parameter/value entries; baseline 3 applies. The phrase 'one or more' adds the useful fact that the values array is a batch update, but no additional syntax or constraint meaning is given.

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 names a specific verb (Set) and resource (surface Extra Data / XDAT values), so an agent understands the concrete mutation. It does not distinguish itself from adjacent siblings such as zemax_get_extra_data or zemax_set_surface_parameter, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives like zemax_set_surface_parameter or the read-side zemax_get_extra_data, and no prerequisites (e.g. an open file, valid surface number). Usage must be fully inferred from the name.

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