render_element_set_output

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, so the description doesn't contradict them. It adds valuable behavioral context: without a path, certain render elements are silently skipped. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand the side-effect of not setting a path.

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 two concise sentences, bilingual, and front-loaded with the core purpose. It avoids redundancy and states the critical consequence in the second sentence, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 setter with three parameters (one required) and no output schema, the description is adequate. It covers the main purpose and the key behavioral nuance (silent skipping), while the schema handles parameter details. No critical information for calling the tool correctly is 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter (index, output, element) including their types and the mutual exclusivity of index/element. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema's coverage, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the verb 'set' and the resource 'output file path for a render element', and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like render_element_add/remove by focusing on path assignment. It also explains the consequence of not setting a path (silent skipping of ZDepth/Normal), which clarifies its purpose in the rendering pipeline.

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 provides clear context: use this to set output paths for render elements, especially to avoid silent skipping. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the consequence statement serves as a strong implicit guideline, making the intended usage unambiguous.

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