set_element_data

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It transparently explains the dry-run behavior, that it returns planned changes without touching the model, and that committing requires dry_run=false. This sufficiently discloses the side effects and return behavior.

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 brief—two sentences—and contains no redundant information. It is well-structured and to the point.

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 description covers the main behavior (dry-run vs commit) and return value, but it omits details about the parameters, especially the expected format of 'changes'. While the tool name and context give some hint, the lack of parameter explanation leaves it incomplete.

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 parameters (port, changes, dry_run) are not described in the tool description. The 'changes' parameter is central but its structure is not explained, and 'port' is ambiguous. The description adds no parameter-level detail.

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 explicitly states 'Write element property values', which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_elements and create_elements.

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 clearly implies this is for modifying element properties, and the dry-run default is a key usage note. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives, though the context is fairly clear.

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