set_filter_pane

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It explains the effect of visible=false and expanded=false, and states the 'Set at least one' constraint, but does not disclose what happens to the other property when only one is specified (e.g., does it remain unchanged?), nor any persistence or side effects. This is a notable gap.

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, front-loaded with the main action, and every clause provides useful information. There is no repetition or fluff, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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 tool is simple, and the description covers the core behavior and parameter usage. Since there is no output schema, return values are not expected. However, it lacks explicit handling of edge cases like page being null vs omitted, or the effect of setting only one boolean. Overall, it is reasonably complete for a state-setting tool.

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 descriptions cover 75% of parameters, and the description adds limited extra meaning: it reinforces the page semantics (already in the schema) and adds the 'Set at least one' constraint, which is not in the schema. However, the descriptions of visible and expanded in the schema are essentially equivalent to the description's phrasing, so the added value is minimal. The reportSessionId parameter remains undocumented in both.

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 opens with 'Show/hide and expand/collapse the FILTER PANE,' a specific verb+resource statement that clearly distinguishes from siblings like set_visual_visibility or hide_filter. It also explains the scope (report-wide vs page), making the 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?

It provides concrete guidance on when to use the tool: to control filter pane visibility and expansion. It explains page scope options ('Omit page to set it report-wide; pass page to override one page') and the boolean semantics for visible and expanded. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not to use it, but the context is clear.

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