sassy_set_config

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action and value format but does not mention side effects, persistence, scope, error behavior, or whether changes apply immediately. For a runtime config setter, this is a notable gap.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear one-line purpose, followed by a list of supported keys and a value format explanation. Every sentence adds useful information, and it is appropriately front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simple parameter set and presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete for a mutation tool. It lacks details about persistence, scope, or consequences of changing config values, which are important for an agent to use it safely and effectively.

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 does so by listing the supported keys and explaining that the value must be JSON-encoded with concrete examples. This gives meaning beyond the bare parameter names, though it could be more explicit about allowed value types per key.

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 states the tool's purpose: 'Set a runtime config value.' It identifies the resource (runtime config) and provides a list of supported keys. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like sassy_get_config or sassy_env_set, so it stops short of a perfect score.

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 supported keys list gives an implied sense of when to use the tool (e.g., to change defaultShell or file limits), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like sassy_env_set or sassy_state_set. No when-not or alternative tools are mentioned, so usage context is only implied.

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