set_visual_title

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and does a good job: it explains the tool is a convenience wrapper, that only specified params are set, and describes the overlay/custom-title behavior. It also notes the interplay with clear_visual_styling, which is useful behavioral context beyond the bare operation.

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?

Three sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, optionality, and preservation behavior. No redundant text, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage pattern, optionality, and special relation to clear_visual_styling. It doesn't specify return values or error behavior, but for a tool with this complexity it's sufficiently complete for an agent to use it correctly in most cases.

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 only 25% (only alignment and fontColor have descriptions). The description helps clarify the core optional parameters show and text ('show=false', 'set custom text'), but doesn't address fontSize, alignment, or fontColor, leaving gaps for these parameters. It partially compensates but not fully.

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 tool sets a visual's TITLE and frames it as a 'typed convenience over set_visual_format', which distinguishes it from the broader set_visual_format sibling. It also references clear_visual_styling, giving it a distinct role in the workflow.

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 explicitly mentions that all params after page/visual are optional and provides specific guidance on preserving a custom title via show=false or custom text. It names set_visual_format as an alternative and clear_visual_styling as a related tool, though it could be more explicit about when to choose this over the alternative.

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