design_set_render_mode

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It helpfully describes the visual effect of each render mode, but it does not disclose mutation side effects, reversibility, required layer state, or what happens if the layer is omitted.

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 two compact sentences, front-loads the action and resource, and then efficiently enumerates the modes. Every phrase adds useful information.

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 two-parameter setter with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is nearly complete for correct invocation. It explains the mode choices well, though it could say more about usage context and mutation behavior.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds meaningful semantics for the mode enum values by explaining what filled, pencil, ink, technical, engraving, and woodcut look like, going beyond the schema's terse 'Render mode.'

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 a specific verb and resource: setting the illustration render mode of a building layer. It clearly explains what each mode means. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as design_set_building_style or design_apply_style, so it falls short of a 5.

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 does not say when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Set' and the building-layer scope.

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