update_module_selection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It states the tool 'narrows scope' and 'affects relevancy', but does not clarify whether the selection is additive or overwriting, whether the change is persistent, or what side effects occur. The absence of output schema also leaves return behavior unclear.

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 are concise and front-loaded; the first states the core function, the second elaborates on the effect. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 complexity of a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a required session_id parameter lacking description, the description is incomplete. It does not explain error handling, parameter constraints, or how the tool fits into the broader workflow with siblings like get_session_context or run_query.

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 67% (two of three parameters have descriptions). The description echoes the schema by mentioning 'object classes or modules' but adds no new semantic detail beyond that. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate given moderate coverage and marginal added value.

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 'narrows the user's scope to specific object classes or modules' with a specific verb ('narrows') and resource ('object classes or modules'). It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_session_context that also handle session state, though the action (update vs. retrieve) is implied.

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 usage when needing to focus on relevant properties, examples, and codelists, but provides no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives among sibling tools. No prerequisites (e.g., session must exist) are mentioned.

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