set_fit_map

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the core behavior: showing strain, stress, or turning the map off. However, it does not explain whether this changes persistent state, requires a loaded garment, or affects other tools, leaving some behavioral context missing.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then provides the necessary parameter values in a compact, readable format.

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 one-parameter setter with no output schema, the description covers the essential information an agent needs: what the tool does, where the effect occurs, and all acceptable mode values. No critical details appear to be missing.

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 input schema only defines 'mode' as a string with no enum or additional description. The description fully compensates by listing the exact valid values ('strain', 'stress', 'off') and their meanings, which is essential for correct invocation.

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 a specific verb ('Show'), a specific resource (CLO's fit map), and a location (the 3D window). It also enumerates the three possible modes, making the tool's scope unambiguous even without opening the schema.

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 implies when to use the tool: whenever the user wants to display or hide the fit map in the 3D window with a particular mode. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention any alternative tools, so usage guidance is only implied rather than directly stated.

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