Set map variable

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Write' which indicates a mutation, but it doesn't disclose whether the variable is created if absent, the role of the 'instance' parameter, or any side effects. The schema's 'instance' field suggests multi-instance support, which is unmentioned.

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 entire description is one sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded and to the point, though it sacrifices content for brevity.

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 the lack of annotations, an output schema, and parameter descriptions, the tool description is inadequate. It fails to explain the instance parameter, differentiate from set_acs_var, or specify behavior when the variable doesn't exist. A more complete description would cover these aspects.

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 must compensate for the three parameters. It implicitly covers 'name' ('by name') and 'value' (the thing written), but it completely omits 'instance' and gives no details about value constraints or how the variable is addressed.

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 uses the specific verb 'Write' and names the resource as 'map-scope ACS variable', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_acs_var (which likely operates on a different scope) and get_map_var (which reads instead of writes). The 'by name' qualifier indicates it operates on a single named variable.

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 is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like set_acs_var or set_map_array. It doesn't mention scope differences or any prerequisites such as an active map session.

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