catia_set_parameter

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the model is recomputed after the change and explains that the string form is safer because CATIA performs unit conversion. This adds meaningful behavior context that is not visible in the annotations or schema alone.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the unit guidance is directly relevant to correct invocation. Every sentence earns its place.

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 setter with a 100%-covered schema and no output schema, the description provides enough for correct invocation: the action, the value alternatives, and the recompute behavior. It does not cover failure cases like unknown parameter names, but those are not essential for a straightforward set operation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds practical guidance on the two value formats: numeric values versus strings with units. It explains why the string form is preferred, which goes beyond the raw schema 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 states a specific action and resource: changing a parameter's value and recomputing the model. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling parameter tools like catia_get_parameter, catia_create_parameter, and catia_delete_parameter by focusing on the modify operation.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: whenever an existing parameter's value needs to be changed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, so it falls short of the top score, but the intended use is unambiguous.

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