item_set_crop

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Only non-None parameters are applied; the rest remain unchanged,' which is a critical nuance preventing misinterpretation of null defaults as clearing values. This adds valuable transparency beyond the schema.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains zero wasted words. It efficiently communicates both the action and the crucial merge behavior.

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?

The tool is a simple setter with 7 parameters and an output schema. The description covers the main action and important partial-update behavior. However, it doesn't specify value units or ranges for the crop numbers, which could lead to ambiguity, but this is a minor gap given the schema richness.

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%, but the description adds key semantics about how parameters behave: non-None values are applied, while null values leave the crop unchanged. This is not inferable from the schema alone and is essential for correct usage.

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 the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Set crop values on a timeline item.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like item_set_transform or item_set_composite, focusing specifically on crop adjustments.

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 tool implies usage when crop values need to be set, but it doesn't explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. The second sentence describes partial-update behavior rather than usage context, so guidance is limited.

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