Set Value

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

The description adds that the previous value is returned for undo, which is consistent with destructiveHint. It mentions auto-resolution but does not elaborate on the confirm parameter's session-unlock behavior. Annotations already provide destructiveHint and idempotentHint, so incremental value is moderate.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, required vs optional, and guidance to another tool. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with the core action.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers essential points: required fields, auto-resolution, and reference to describe_device_type. It does not detail the confirm parameter's authorization effect, which is left to the schema. Still, it is largely complete for an agent.

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 clarifies that interface and type are optional and auto-resolved, adding context beyond the schema field descriptions. However, it does not provide additional meaning for other parameters.

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 explicitly states 'Set a single datapoint value on a device channel,' providing a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_value and put_paramset by focusing on a single datapoint.

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 indicates only three parameters are required and that interface/type are auto-resolved, guiding efficient use. It also advises using describe_device_type to find valid valueKeys. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from system variable setting or other siblings.

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