Set Workflow

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

Annotations already declare the mutation/idempotency profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: the session-wide side effect that "all tools that omit coordinate_system will use the session default" and the exact auto-detection mapping for clear. It does not state persistence across sessions/restarts, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the call trigger, then the reset mechanism. Each sentence carries distinct information with 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?

With no output schema, the description must carry the behavioral burden, and it does: purpose, call timing, session-level propagation effect, and reset semantics are all covered for a 3-param optional settings tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining the net effect of clear:true and spelling out the auto-detection mapping (CMYK/print → document coords, RGB/web → artboard-web), which the enum descriptions do not provide.

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 ("Set the session-level workflow and default coordinate system") and conveys the session-wide scope, which implicitly distinguishes it from the per-call convert_coordinate sibling. However, it never names a sibling explicitly, so it stops short of the strongest differentiation mark.

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?

Gives a clear trigger ("Call this after confirming the user's intent (web, print, or video)") and a reset condition via clear:true. It does not state when NOT to use it or point to convert_coordinate as the per-call alternative, so no explicit exclusions are present.

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