Select fixtures

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so richly: mutation semantics (add vs replace based on active values), clear_first deterministic option, non-destructive to programmer values, verification of Selection.CountTotalSelected, listing of first 50 members, and serialization scope. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs.

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?

Front-loads the core action and then layers behavioral details in a logical order. It is dense but every sentence adds value; slightly long for a two-parameter tool, though justified by the complexity of the selection semantics.

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?

Complete for a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. It covers side effects, determinism, verification, and serialization limits, leaving no significant gaps for correct invocation.

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 the schema already documents both parameters including examples and defaults. The description adds context about clear_first's effect (deterministic result) but no syntax beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Select fixtures ... in the programmer') and immediately grounds it with concrete examples of selection expressions. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like gma3_clear_programmer or gma3_selection_grid without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly describes when the tool adds to vs. replaces the selection, and names clear_first as the deterministic alternative with its precondition. It also delineates behavior vs. siblings by noting it does not clear programmer values.

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