set_auto_dismiss

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 only states the action but reveals nothing about side effects (e.g., persistence, scope, whether a restart is needed, or what happens to currently open dialogs). This is a minimal disclosure for a state-changing tool.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that communicates the tool's entire purpose with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the simplicity of the tool.

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 boolean setter with no output schema and one parameter, the description is largely complete. However, it could mention whether the setting persists across sessions or affects the current project, which would round out the context. Still, it covers the main action well.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It implicitly conveys that the boolean 'enabled' maps to enabling/disabling the behavior, but it does not explicitly reference the parameter name or define true/false semantics. This adds some meaning but leaves the mapping to inference.

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 a specific verb ('Enable or disable') and clearly identifies the resource ('automatic dismissal of blocking modal dialogs in the editor'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, which are mostly about nodes, scenes, and assets.

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 implies the tool is used to control the editor's auto-dismiss behavior for modal dialogs, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or mention alternatives. The context is fairly obvious given the tool's purpose, but no exclusions or comparisons are stated.

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