Use Poietic design

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the content-hash snapshot behavior and the conditional write-refusal state, which are important non-obvious behaviors. It stops short of stating whether this tool itself modifies the file, but the main statefulness is covered.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and no filler. The workspace restriction and stale-baseline consequence are conveyed efficiently.

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 one-parameter state-setting tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers its purpose, the main constraint, and a key failure mode. It could be slightly more explicit about side effects and which sibling tool performs the re-read, but overall it is adequate for 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?

The schema already fully documents the single 'design' parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the workspace-origin detail, but this mostly restates the schema's 'inside the workspace' constraint rather than adding meaningful new parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific action ('Set') and resource ('current design file'), and clarifies that it establishes session state for subsequent tools. This distinguishes it from siblings like poietic_get_design (read) and poietic_new_design (create).

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?

Frames this as a prerequisite for subsequent tools, which tells the agent when to call it, and it gives a hard path constraint and a re-read instruction after external changes. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the context is clear.

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