set_question_properties

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

Annotations already indicate non-readonly (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false), so the description's extra note about unsettable properties adds minimal behavioral context. It does not disclose side effects, error handling, or atomicity beyond what annotations imply.

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 sentence that front-loads the primary action and appends a concise constraint. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 mutation tool with a nested object parameter and no output schema, the description lacks details on success/failure reporting, response format, or partial update behavior. Schema and annotations cover only part of the context, leaving gaps for a complete understanding.

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?

Even though schema description coverage is 100%, the main description adds unique value by specifying which properties cannot be set, guiding valid usage of the aQuestionData parameter. This provides semantic constraints beyond the schema's raw property descriptions.

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 'Set' and resource 'properties of a question', and explicitly lists properties that cannot be set (qid, gid, sid, type, language), distinguishing it from siblings like get_question_properties or set_survey_properties.

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 provides a useful constraint on which properties cannot be set, but does not explicitly explain when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_question_properties for reading, or when to avoid setting certain properties). It gives indirect guidance but lacks 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.