coronium_set_modem_metadata

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

Discloses that the note is 'Visible only to the owner', adding useful context. However, it does not describe whether the metadata is overwritten, required permissions, or the response format, which is important given no annotations are provided.

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?

A single, straightforward sentence that front-loads the action and includes a relevant example. No wasted words.

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 tool with fully documented parameters, the description provides purpose and a visibility constraint. It could mention overwrite behavior or return value, but given the tool's simplicity, it is adequately complete.

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 input schema already documents both parameters with examples and constraints (100% coverage). The description adds an example value for metadata but does not explain the proxy identifier beyond the schema.

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 the action: 'Set a free-form metadata note on a modem' with a concrete example. It distinguishes from siblings like 'coronium_apply_modem_settings' by focusing on metadata rather than settings.

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?

It provides a use case ('useful for tagging proxies in agent workflows') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. Usage is implied rather than fully guided.

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