set_token

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of disclosing behavior. It does disclose that the token is session-scoped, which is valuable. However, it doesn't mention side effects like overwriting an existing token, validation behavior, or whether the token persists beyond the session. The word 'set' implies a write operation, but deeper behavioral details are missing.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, scope, and where to get the token in one breath. Every part contributes value, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers what the tool does and where to get the token. However, it doesn't explicitly state that this token is required for the sibling tools (submit_lookup, check_lookup), which would enhance completeness for an agent navigating the toolset.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters, with the token parameter described as 'Your YourICP API token'. The description adds useful context by providing the URL to obtain the token, which clarifies the token's origin and purpose beyond the schema. This enrichment justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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 the YourICP API token for this session.' The verb 'set' is specific, and the resource 'API token' is unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools (submit_lookup, check_lookup) which perform lookups rather than setup.

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 provides clear context: the token is set for the current session, implying it should be used before making authenticated calls. It also instructs where to obtain the token ('Get one at https://app.youricp.com'). While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, the session scoping makes the usage context obvious.

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