set_custom_return_statement

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

Annotations indicate idempotent=true and non-destructive. The description adds context about extending core return_statements and the modify-via-delete pattern, which is consistent and adds value beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences: the first defines the core action, the second adds crucial usage instruction. Every sentence is essential, no fluff.

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 lacks detail on what happens if the statement already exists (overwrite?) and does not mention return values. Given no output schema, this is a moderate gap for a simple set operation.

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 coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The description does not add new meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates the parameter purpose, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 tool adds a custom return statement to a helper function, extending core return_statements. It distinguishes from the sibling 'delete_custom_return_statement' by implying the add operation and noting the modification pattern.

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 explicitly instructs 'To modify: delete first, then set new statement,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives beyond the delete tool, leaving room for improvement.

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