Set selection

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: it discloses that elements on hidden/locked layers or another story may fail, exposes the failure channel via the 'failed' array, and warns that selection changes are not undo steps — a critical behavioral trait the annotations do not convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then mode semantics, failure caveats, and output shape in order of importance. Dense but every sentence carries actionable information with no filler.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description supplies the return shape ({mode, requested, applied, failed, selectionCount}) and covers failure conditions and the undo caveat. Nothing needed to invoke or interpret the call is missing.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by spelling out each enum mode's effect and clarifying that 'elements' is required for 'add' and 'remove'. This adds genuine semantic meaning beyond the schema's terse 'Default set'.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Changes the Archicad selection') plus its two purposes — visual highlighting and preparing a selection-based command. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_selection and find_elements, which read rather than set the selection.

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?

Defines what each mode means ('set' replaces, 'add' adds, 'remove' deselects, 'clear' deselects everything), which is effectively when-to-use guidance for the operation. It does not explicitly point to alternatives such as get_selection for reading the current selection, leaving one inference to the agent.

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