set_viewport_shading

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

The idempotentHint annotation already signals that setting is safe to repeat, and the description adds the valid mode values, which are not present in the schema. It does not contradict the annotation. Some context about it being a display-only change is implied rather than explicit, but the added value is solid.

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, front-loaded sentence conveys the action, target, and complete value set with zero filler. Every word contributes essential 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 one-parameter setter with an idempotency annotation and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It does not explain subtle differences between the modes (e.g., that RENDERED may use the render engine), but for a typical Blender user these are well-understood, and the tool's simplicity keeps the omission minor.

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 schema provides no description or enum for the 'mode' parameter (0% coverage), yet the description fully compensates by listing all accepted values: WIREFRAME, SOLID, MATERIAL, RENDERED. This is exactly the semantic enrichment needed for correct invocation.

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 a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('viewport shading mode'), immediately distinguishing it from sibling viewport tools like capture_viewport, set_viewport_camera, and get_viewport_info. It also enumerates the valid modes, making the tool's function unambiguous.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool—when you need to change the viewport's shading mode. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., set_smooth_shading for normals), but the specificity is enough to infer its niche.

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