Set Setting

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

While the 'destructiveHint' annotation already flags the tool as potentially destructive, the description adds context about the consequences ('can affect QGIS behavior') and reinforces the caution, which is valuable beyond the annotation.

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 concise, using one sentence to state the purpose and one sentence for caution. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. However, it could be slightly more structured by optionally listing example keys.

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 set operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat complete in warning about consequences, but it lacks parameter details. The agent might not know valid keys or value formats, which is a gap.

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 does not explain the meaning or allowed values of the 'key' and 'value' parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so, leaving the agent without guidance on what settings can be modified.

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 'Write a QGIS setting,' which is a specific verb+resource. It also distinguishes from the sibling 'get_setting' by implying write vs. read, and includes a caution about impact on behavior.

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 gives a clear caution: 'Use with care — incorrect settings can affect QGIS behavior.' This provides usage guidance by warning about potential risks, though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives.

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