vw2d_set_attributes

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: class_name creates the class if missing, changes are 'One undo step,' and by_class is recommended for consistency. It does not discuss permissions or failure modes, but it covers the key mutation semantics.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core action, and each sentence provides essential information about parameter behavior or side effects.

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 lack of an output schema and the presence of annotations, the description is nearly complete: it covers mutation behavior, undo, and most parameter details. The omission of `uuids` is the main missing piece for full correctness.

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 thoroughly documents `class_name`, `layer`, and especially `attributes` with accepted values and formats, but it completely omits the required `uuids` parameter, leaving a significant gap.

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 verb and resource: 'Change class, layer or graphic attributes of objects.' It clearly distinguishes the operation from generic editing siblings, though it does not explicitly name an alternative tool to contrast with.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose, and some guidance is given for attribute values (e.g., `{"by_class": true}` is 'recommended'). However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like `vw2d_edit` or `vw2d_transform`, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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