set_streaming_source

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'Configure' without explaining side effects, whether it overwrites existing streaming sources, prerequisites, or reversibility. This is vague for a mutation tool and leaves the agent without critical safety context.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It contains no unnecessary words, but could arguably include more detail without becoming verbose.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and only two parameters, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what a streaming source component is, how the radius interacts with the actor, or any side effects. An agent lacks sufficient information to predict the tool's impact, making this incomplete for safe invocation.

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 100%, with clear descriptions for both `actor_name` and `radius`. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, but the schema already handles this, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly identifies the action ('Configure') and the specific resource ('streaming source component on an actor') with context ('for World Partition'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_actor_property or set_data_layer_state, though it could be more explicit about what 'configure' entails.

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 phrase 'for World Partition' implies the tool is intended for World Partition workflows, giving some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., set_actor_property) or any exclusions, leaving the guidance largely implicit.

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