openclaw_exec_approvals_node_set

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It labels the operation as 'Destructive' but provides no further details on side effects, permissions required, or what constitutes a valid policy. The internal wrapper name offers no behavioral insight.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The 'Destructive.' tag is concise but informative. The internal wrapper reference adds minimal value and could be omitted for clarity. Still, overall efficient.

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?

The description lacks return value info, expected input format for policy, and any link to related tools. Given no output schema, the description should hint at what 'setting' entails. Significant gaps remain for a safe and correct 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 coverage is 100% (both nodeId and instance have descriptions). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. No need for compensation.

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 verb (Set), resource (exec approvals policy), and scope (for a specific node). It distinguishes from sibling tools like openclaw_exec_approvals_set (global) and openclaw_exec_approvals_node_get (read). The internal wrapper reference and 'Destructive' tag reinforce the action.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., openclaw_exec_approvals_set). No prerequisites, context, or when-not-to-use conditions provided. The agent must infer from the name alone.

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