kv_set

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burdenhand. 'Set' implies mutation, but the description does not disclose whether setting the same key overwrites existing values, what 'small' means as a limit, or what happens when a TTL expires. These are important gaps for a mutating KV tool.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no fluff. The core action and sharing semantics come first, and the optional TTL is appended efficiently. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

The core invocation details (key, value, optional TTL) and the sharing purpose are present, and an output schema exists so return values need not be described. However, missing overwrite behavior, size constraints, and TTL expiration details reduce completeness for a tool with no annotations.

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 50%, with value and project_id already described. The description adds 'small' to value and clarifies TTL behavior in seconds, but it leaves 'key' unexplained and does not elaborate on TTL expiration semantics. It compensates partially but not fully for the undocumented fields.

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 uses a clear verb ('Set') and specific resource ('small shared JSON value'), and 'other sessions can discover' distinguishes it from the kv_get/kv_list/kv_delete siblings. It also signals the optional TTL, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 clearly states the intended use: storing a shared JSON value that other sessions can discover. It gives context for when this tool is relevant, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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