set_visible

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

The description adds the return value shape '{ ok, nodeId }' beyond what annotations provide. Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive. However, no additional behavior is disclosed (e.g., idempotency, errors for invalid nodeId).

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 very concise with only one sentence plus return value. No unnecessary words. However, it could be structured to include brief context or examples without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (boolean toggle) and presence of output description, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks information about error conditions, behavior when node does not exist, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description does not add any extra meaning or constraints beyond what is in the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'show or hide' and the resource 'node'. It is specific enough to convey the core functionality. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'set_opacity' or 'set_mask' that also affect appearance.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, when to prefer this over similar tools, or situations where it should not be used.

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