Replace current selection

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses that the current selection is fully replaced and that previous hand-selected items are deselected. This is a meaningful side-effect disclosure. It does not address invalid GUID behavior or persistence, but it covers the main behavioral surprise.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The core action is stated first, and the additional side-effect about deselecting prior hand-selected items is conveyed in a second concise sentence.

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 simple selection setter, the description covers the core behavior and the meaning of the required parameter. The main omission is port semantics, though port is optional and the output schema plus annotations provide some surrounding context.

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 description adds domain meaning to guids by calling them 'element GUIDs', which helps beyond the raw schema. However, the optional port parameter is left completely unexplained, and with 0% schema description coverage the description does not fully compensate for that gap.

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 states a specific verb ('replace') with a clear resource ('current selection') and mechanism ('given element GUIDs'). It also explicitly notes that any hand-selected items are deselected, which clearly distinguishes it from get_selection and clear_selection.

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 implies the tool is used when the agent wants to set or replace the current selection with specific GUIDs, but it never explicitly contrasts this with get_selection or clear_selection. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided beyond the implied purpose.

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