spss_variable_labels

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It reveals the mutation action and the SPSS requirement, but does not state whether the file is modified in place, what output_path does when null, whether existing labels are overwritten, or what the response contains.

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?

At roughly three short clauses, it is brief and front-loaded with the core command. The syntax example and labels shape earn their place, though the structure is fragmentary rather than a clean prose definition.

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?

Given no annotations and no schema descriptions, the description is too sparse to let an agent invoke this reliably. It omits file_path semantics, output handling, and overwrite behavior, while only partially addressing labels.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description needed to document all three parameters; it only clarifies labels as {variable: label}. file_path and output_path remain unexplained in either schema or description.

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?

States a concrete operation ('Set variable labels') and identifies the resource with the exact SPSS syntax. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling spss_value_labels, so differentiation rests on the tool name and syntax rather than the description.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this tool over spss_value_labels or other transformation siblings. The only context is the prerequisite 'Requires IBM SPSS Statistics,' which is an environment constraint rather than usage guidance.

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