set_log_level

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the effect on log verbosity and the trade-off of high verbosity, but it does not mention persistence, whether the change applies immediately, or what the response looks like. Some behavioral gaps remain.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence provides useful information. No fluff or repetition. The level ordering and troubleshooting note are essential and efficiently integrated.

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-parameter setter, the description covers the purpose, parameter semantics, and usage guidance. It does not describe the return value or whether the setting persists, but given the tool's simplicity and the schema's completeness, these gaps are minor.

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?

Although the schema already covers the parameter fully with an enum and description, the description adds semantic value by ordering the levels from least to most verbose and explaining the practical implication of choosing a higher level. This goes beyond the schema's bare listing.

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 'Set the server logging level,' which is a specific verb and resource. It further clarifies the scope as the LSP MCP server, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_diagnostics or restart_lsp_server. The purpose is unambiguous and concise.

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 gives clear context: use this tool to control log verbosity, and notes that increasing verbosity can help troubleshoot issues but may produce large output. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the tool is unique among siblings, so the guidance is sufficient.

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