eda_sys_storage_set_extension_user_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the Promise<boolean> return type, the create-if-absent side effect, the extension-only restriction, and the unconditional throw in standalone scripts. This gives an agent a clear picture of side effects and failure modes.

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 compact and front-loaded: signature first, core behavior second, then the two caveats in short labeled remarks. Every sentence carries information and there is 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?

For a simple single-key setter, this is complete: the agent knows what it does, what it returns, when it creates, when it throws, and how to pass parameters. No output schema exists, but the Promise<boolean> return is explicitly stated.

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 JSON schema only exposes a generic args array, but the description supplies the official signature with key as string and value as any, adding ordering and meaning that the schema lacks. It does not further constrain value, but value is intentionally any, so no extra detail is needed.

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 opens with the exact API signature, `sys_Storage.setExtensionUserConfig(key: string, value: any)`, and clearly states it sets an extension user config. The singular setExtensionUserConfig plus the auto-create remark distinguishes it from storage siblings like delete/get/clear and from set_extension_all_user_configs.

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?

It explicitly says the same interface is used to create a new config when one does not exist, giving a clear when-to-use signal. It also warns that calls in a standalone script environment will always throw, which is a useful exclusion, though it does not explicitly name sibling get/delete/clear tools as alternatives.

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