new_set

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it discloses that unsaved changes are refused by default, that discard_unsaved=True answers the save prompt with 'Don't Save' (data loss), the UI-automation dependency, and a confirm-with-user instruction. This is exactly the extra behavioral context a destructive tool needs.

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-loads the '[UI automation]' marker and the core behavior, then adds constraints. Mostly tight, though the parenthetical menu path and save-prompt detail add some density, still all earning their 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 destructive, environment-dependent mutation, the description covers the dependency check, the data-loss semantics, and the user-confirmation requirement. No output schema is needed for an action of this kind.

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% and the single parameter has no schema description, so the description must compensate. It explains that discard_unsaved=True causes the save prompt to be answered 'Don't Save' (i.e., unsaved work is lost) and that the default refuses unsaved changes, which is more than the bare boolean schema provides.

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 ('Start a new empty Live Set'), names the menu path (File > New Live Set), and describes the effect ('replacing the current one'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings open_set and save_set.

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?

Explains the prerequisite (macOS UI automation must be available and get_status shows whether/how to enable it) and the destructive-confirmation requirement. It does not explicitly contrast with open_set/save_set, but the context is clear enough for correct selection.

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