Set Setting

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

The description adds context beyond the destructiveHint annotation by stating that incorrect settings can affect behavior, implying the tool modifies QGIS state. However, it does not specify which behaviors are affected or provide details about reversibility or side effects.

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 concise with two sentences. The first sentence clearly states the action, and the second provides a necessary warning. It is front-loaded, but could benefit from parameter details without losing conciseness.

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 two-parameter tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It lacks parameter semantics and usage guidelines, which are expected for full context.

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 description provides no information about the 'key' and 'value' parameters. Since the input schema has no descriptions for these parameters and schema coverage is 0%, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 verb 'Write' and the resource 'a QGIS setting', making the action distinct. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_setting', but the name itself implies writing, so purpose is mostly clear.

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 only provides a general warning about incorrect settings affecting QGIS behavior, but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., modifying project variables). No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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