set_constraints

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the return value { ok, nodeId } but does not disclose other behavioral details like prerequisite node types or conflict handling. This is adequate given annotation coverage.

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 concise sentence plus return type, front-loaded with the action. Every word is necessary with no redundancy.

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?

With 3 parameters, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is too sparse. It does not explain constraint value meanings or provide enough context for correct usage, making 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate by explaining the enum values (MIN, CENTER, MAX, STRETCH, SCALE) for horizontal and vertical parameters. Parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory but insufficient without value semantics.

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 sets a node's resize constraints relative to its parent, using a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like set_auto_layout or set_opacity, so it differentiates well.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description does not mention when to set constraints vs. other node modifications, nor does it exclude any use cases.

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