set_paste_strategy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the parameters and basic effect (selects a strategy), but does not disclose persistence, immediate impact, or side effects of setting the strategy or overriding fallback.

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 (three sentences) and front-loaded with the core action. No extraneous information is included.

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 no output schema and a simple setter action, the description is largely complete. It covers parameter usage and source of valid values, but could mention return behavior (e.g., success indication) for full completeness.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the 'auto' option, giving examples of valid strategy names, and explicitly tying names to list_paste_strategies, which the schema description does not.

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 selects a paste strategy with specific verb 'Select'. It provides examples and references list_paste_strategies, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like auto_paste or get_active_paste_strategy.

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 explains how to use the tool (pass 'auto' or a specific name, optionally override fallback), but lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus other paste-related siblings like test_paste_strategy or auto_paste.

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