set_encapsulated

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without mentioning prerequisites (e.g., block existence), side effects, error conditions, or reversibility. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single sentence that is perfectly concise and front-loaded. It states the action, the target, and the allowed value with zero waste.

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 setter with two parameters and an output schema, the description is adequate but missing context such as whether the Block must exist, behavior on invalid input, and any side effects. Given no annotations, it could be more complete.

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 must compensate. It clarifies that 'value' should be 'true' or 'false', but does not explain 'element_id' beyond implying it identifies a Block. This partially compensates but leaves element_id semantics under-specified.

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 it sets the isEncapsulated tagged value on a Block, with a specific verb and resource. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling set_* tools, but the target attribute is unique enough that an agent can infer its purpose.

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 usage is implied: use it when you want to set that tagged value. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives, despite many sibling set_* tools. It's a simple operation, so the implication is acceptable but not explicit.

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