set_network

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It indicates mutation (setting default) but does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, reversibility, or other behavioral traits. The scope 'for one family' provides partial context.

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 sentences, no filler. Front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by supported values. Every sentence 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?

For a simple setter with two parameters and no output schema, the description provides adequate context: what it does, the parameter possibilities, and scope. However, behavioral details (e.g., effects, persistence) are missing, which could be important for an AI agent.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining the concept of aliases versus explicit network keys, which goes beyond the schema's examples. This helps the agent understand parameter semantics more precisely.

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 default network for one family, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_network' (read) and 'get_supported_networks' (list), and provides concrete examples of supported aliases.

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 implies usage context (setting a default) but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are mentioned, though the broad sibling set suggests complementary tools for reading or other actions.

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