set_storage_place_submaster

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Set value on deck A or B' without mentioning whether it is destructive, reversible, requires authentication, or what side effects occur. 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 short (one phrase), but conciseness is not completeness. It omits critical information, making it under-specified rather than efficiently clear.

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 2 required parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, and many similar sibling tools, the description is wholly inadequate. It does not explain what a submaster is, the deck concept, or the value's role, leaving an AI agent without sufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. However, it does not explain what values 'deck' can take (A or B? both?) or what 'value' represents (range, units, meaning). No additional meaning is added beyond the parameter names and types.

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 states 'Set value on deck A or B' which conveys a verb and resource, but it is vague: it doesn't clarify what 'submaster' means or how it differs from sibling tools like set_deck_submaster. The purpose is partially clear but lacks specificity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_deck_submaster or set_storage_place_filter. The description implies usage only through the tool name, with no explicit context or exclusions.

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