set_fx_param

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true. The description adds the name→index resolution feature but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as whether the change is reversible, authorization requirements, or side effects. It relies on annotations.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. No wasted words; the parenthetical provides key technical detail without verbosity.

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 description is minimal. It explains name resolution but omits details on other parameters (track, fx, value) and usage context. Although an output schema exists, the description does not address what the tool returns or error conditions.

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 meaning to the 'param' parameter by explaining name→index resolution. However, it does not clarify 'track', 'fx', or 'value' (e.g., range or units). Partial coverage.

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 'Set an FX parameter', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_fx_params (read) and add_fx_by_name (add).

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 usage for setting FX parameters by name, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_fx_params or add_fx_by_name. No guidance on prerequisites or complementary tools.

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