sassy_state_set

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that values persist across sessions, which is the primary behavior. However, it does not disclose whether values overwrite existing ones, any size/type restrictions, permissions needed, or failure modes. The phrase 'any value' is also misleading because the schema restricts 'value' to a string.

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 that captures the core function without extraneous words. Every word contributes meaning, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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 tool, the description gives the essential purpose, and the existence of an output schema covers return values. However, it lacks context about how the state is namespaced (by tool), overwrite behavior, and how it relates to sassy_state_get and sassy_state_clear. This would be helpful for agents to understand the state lifecycle without requiring extra investigation.

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 0%, so the description must clarify the parameters. It implies tool_name and value but does not explicitly explain 'key' as the identifier for retrieval. The claim of persisting 'any value' contradicts the schema's string type for 'value', potentially confusing agents. The description adds minimal value over the schemas intrinsic names.

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 'persist' and identifies the resource as 'any value for any tool', clearly indicating the tool sets persistent state across sessions. It naturally distinguishes from sibling tools like sassy_state_get and sassy_state_clear, which retrieve and clear state respectively.

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 sassy_state_get, sassy_state_clear, or memory-related tools. It merely states what the tool does without mentioning use cases or exclusions.

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