manage_selection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only lists actions without disclosing side effects, permissions, rate limits, or failure behavior. The agent lacks key context for robust usage.

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 very concise, front-loading the core purpose. However, given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, multiple actions), it could be slightly expanded without losing efficiency.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not mention return values or behavior for actions like 'get', 'cached', or 'watch'. This leaves a significant gap for the agent to understand what the tool returns.

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?

The input schema covers all parameters with detailed descriptions (100% coverage), so the description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool manages selection: 'Get, set, or clear selection.' and lists both basic and PRO actions, distinguishing it from sibling tools like manage_properties or manage_studio.

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 implies usage (e.g., basic vs PRO actions) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. No direct guidance on when-not to use.

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