selection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the important dual behavior: read by default, replace when set_ids is supplied. However, it doesn't state permission/context requirements or confirm that replacing is non-destructive, so behavioral disclosure is only partial.

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 tight clauses, front-loaded with the read behavior, then the set_ids mode and its rationale in a single parenthetical. 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?

Low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and an output schema (so return values needn't be described). The description covers both modes and the parameter's intent, leaving only minor gaps like id format and any UI/permission preconditions.

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 0%, so the description must explain the sole parameter, and it does: set_ids replaces the selection and is tied to a concrete purpose (showing the user which objects you mean). It does not spell out the id format, but the meaning of the parameter is clear.

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 (read) and resource (the current selection), and also names the second mode (replace via set_ids). It is distinguishable from siblings like inspect or find, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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?

Gives a clear condition for the mutating mode: use set_ids to show the user which objects you mean. The read-only default is implied by the absence of set_ids. No explicit when-not or named alternative tools, so it falls short of a 5.

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