select_actors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explain what happens to the previous selection (replaced or appended), how invalid names are handled, or whether any confirmation or return value is expected. This leaves the agent guessing about side effects.

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 unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for the simplicity of the tool, and every word contributes to stating the tool's core function.

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?

With only one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core action but omits edge-case behavior (e.g., effect on current selection, handling of unknown actor names). For a simple tool this may be acceptable, but a bit more detail would improve completeness.

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?

The schema covers the 'names' parameter with a description 'Actor names or labels to select', giving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional detail beyond that, so the parameter semantics are fully handled by the schema, meriting the baseline score of 3.

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 'Set the editor's actor selection' uses a specific verb ('set') and a clear resource ('actor selection'), distinctly differentiating it from sibling tools like list_actors, spawn_actor, and delete_actor. The purpose is immediately understandable.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites or context. While it is the only selection-related tool among the siblings, the description does not explicitly state 'use this to select actors' or provide any situational cues.

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