set_instance_properties

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

The description discloses that unspecified properties keep their values (non-destructive update), SLOT properties are not settable, and returns {ok, nodeId}. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, consistent with the description's partial update behavior. Adds useful context 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 sentences, no redundant words. First sentence gives purpose and property types. Second sentence covers key conventions, exceptions, and return value. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description covers parameter semantics, value types, key format, exceptions (SLOT not settable), and return value. For a tool with 2 parameters and high schema coverage, this is fully sufficient for an agent to use it correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant meaning by explaining the key naming convention (verbatim names, suffix '#id' for boolean/text/instance_swap) and the INSTANCE_SWAP value format (target component node id). This helps the agent form correct parameter values 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 'Set an instance's component properties' listing the property types (variant/boolean/text/instance-swap), providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_text_properties or set_fills which target different node types or properties.

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 explains how to construct property keys and values, including suffixes and exceptions for SLOT properties. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_text_properties, set_fills, or bind_variable_to_node, leaving the agent to infer context from the property types.

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