set_parameter_available_values

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses key behaviors: writing ParameterValue entries for static source, clearing when static_values is empty, writing DataSetReference for query source, and replacing any existing ValidValues block.

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 a single paragraph that is dense but well-organized. It front-loads the overall purpose and then details three specific cases. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main behaviors thoroughly. It explains both source modes, clearing, and replacement. However, it lacks explicit details on error conditions, prerequisites, or handling of null static_values (only mentions omitted/empty).

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds essential meaning beyond the schema. It explains how the source parameter determines behavior, the role of static_values, and the concept of query dataset references. It clarifies the implications of empty or omitted static_values.

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 action (set or clear <ValidValues> on a report parameter) and distinguishes between static and query sources. It contrasts with sibling tools like set_parameter_default_values and set_parameter_prompt by focusing specifically on available values.

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 implies when to use this tool (to configure valid values) and explains the clearing behavior. It does not explicitly exclude scenarios or name alternatives, but the context of sibling tools makes the purpose clear.

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