set_setting

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions scope and default, but fails to state that the tool modifies settings (persistence), permissions required, error behavior, or side effects. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise with one sentence and a scope note. No fluff, but this conciseness sacrifices necessary detail. Still, it is front-loaded and every word 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?

Given the lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is too short to be complete. It does not specify valid keys, value types, persistence behavior, error cases, or relationship to get_setting. The tool requires more contextual information for reliable use.

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 compensate for missing parameter explanations. It only adds context for 'scope' (options: view/window) but provides no details on valid 'key' names, value formats, or how values are interpreted. The description adds minimal value over the schema titles.

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 action (Set) and the resource (Sublime Text setting by key). It differentiates from sibling tools like get_setting and other 'set' tools (set_encoding, set_layout) by specifying general settings rather than specific ones.

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 provides only the scope parameter options ('view' or 'window') but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_setting (for reading) or other 'set' tools. Implicit differentiation exists via sibling names, but explicit usage context is missing.

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