set_statetree_color

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Add or update' implying mutation, and gives color format details, but does not mention side effects, overwrite behavior, persistence, permissions, or return values. This is insufficient for full transparency.

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 concise with a single-purpose sentence followed by parameter details in a list format. It front-loads the purpose and avoids unnecessary words. The structure is informal but effective.

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 that an output schema exists, the description need not detail return values. However, it omits prerequisites (e.g., asset existence), error conditions, and what happens on conflict. It provides adequate parameter info but lacks full context for a mutation tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant meaning: 'asset_path' is 'Content path to the StateTree asset', 'name' is 'Display name for the color', and 'color' specifies acceptable formats (hex or RGBA floats). This provides clear semantic context 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 clearly states 'Add or update a color in the StateTree theme,' identifying the verb (add/update) and resource (color in theme). It distinguishes from sibling tools that deal with other aspects like states or tasks, although it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other set_statetree_* 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred use cases. The usage is only implied by the purpose.

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