gh_set_slider

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

Annotations only set readOnlyHint to false, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does not disclose potential side effects, whether the value must be within an existing slider range, or what happens if an invalid component_id is provided. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the mutation implied by 'Set'.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It is efficiently structured, though it carries so little detail that the conciseness borders on under-specification.

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 setter operation, this is minimally viable: it states the target component and the value to set, and an output schema exists so return-value documentation is not required. However, it omits context about slider domain constraints and how component_id is resolved, leaving notable gaps for an agent invoking the tool correctly.

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 should compensate for missing parameter documentation. It clarifies that the value is numeric, matching the schema type, but it does not explain component_id semantics, such as the expected identifier format or that it must reference an existing slider component.

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 ('Set') with a clear resource ('Number Slider component') and target ('numeric value'), making the operation unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like gh_place_slider or gh_set_parameter, but the component type is specific enough to avoid most confusion.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gh_set_parameter, gh_set_toggle, or gh_place_slider. It also does not mention prerequisites like the slider needing to already exist in the Grasshopper document.

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