Sb3 Set Variable

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It reveals that the tool mutates state and is 'proxied', but it does not explain what proxying means, whether the change persists, what happens if the target does not exist, or how creation differs from setting an existing variable.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, with no filler. The parenthetical '(proxied)' is cryptic and does not clearly earn its place, but overall the structure is economical.

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 mutation tool with three parameters, no annotations, and no visible parameter documentation, the description is too thin. An agent still lacks needed details about target identifiers, value serialization, and failure behavior. The presence of an output schema helps with return values but not with input semantics.

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%, so the description should compensate by explaining name, value, and target semantics. It only restates the concept of a target and gives no detail on value format, naming rules, or how the create/set behavior is triggered. The parameter names are self-explanatory enough to avoid a score of 1.

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 states a specific operation ('Set/create') and a clear resource ('a variable on a target'), so an agent can understand the core purpose. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this local-variable tool from the sibling sb3_cloud_set_var, so sibling differentiation is incomplete.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool instead of related siblings such as sb3_cloud_set_var, sb3_delete_variable, or sb3_set_list. The description only says what the tool does, not under what conditions it should be chosen.

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