archicad_set_element_ids

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the mutation/safety profile is partly covered. The description adds real value by disclosing that the change is revertible via archicad_undo, but it does not note the tension between 'changes IDs' and destructiveHint=false, nor whether operations are atomic across the id list.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action, with the three modes compactly parenthesized and the recovery note at the end. No filler.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the essentials are present (modes, revert path, dryRun in schema), but the concept of 'in scope' — which determines what numbering and fixDuplicates actually touch across elements/selectedOnly/elementType — is never defined in the description, leaving a meaningful gap.

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%, including the non-obvious fixDuplicates numbering rule and the numbering format example, so the schema carries the parameter burden and baseline 3 applies. The description restates the modes but adds no syntax or scoping detail beyond the schema.

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 ('Changes element IDs') and then enumerates the three operating modes (explicit values, fixDuplicates suffixes, numbering sequence), which lets an agent distinguish it from any sibling — no other tool in the list sets IDs.

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?

It names one recovery path ('Revert with archicad_undo'), which is genuinely useful guidance, and the mode enumeration implies which parameter to reach for. But it never states when to prefer this over adjacent tools like SetPropertyValuesOfElements, nor any precondition (e.g., element selection or type scoping needed before calling).

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