cavalry_set_generator

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It implies a mutation operation (set) and provides an example, but does not disclose side effects, success/failure behavior, or layer compatibility requirements beyond the Basic Shape example.

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 sentences, with the main action in the first sentence and a clarifying example/secondary hint in the second. No redundant 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 tool, the description provides the action, an example, and a discovery method, which is adequate, though it lacks explicit return-value or error handling details.

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 already describes both layerId and generatorId with examples, and the description's example of 'ellipse or rectangle' mirrors the schema's examples without adding significant new semantics.

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 uses the specific verb 'Set' with resource 'a generator on a layer' and provides an example with Basic Shape, clearly distinguishing it from other cavalry tools like cavalry_set_attribute.

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 gives contextual guidance by directing the user to api.getGenerators(layerId) to discover available generators, implying this tool is for setting one of those. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools such as set_attribute.

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