logging_setLevel

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the effect of setting the minimum level but does not discuss persistence, scope, or side effects. The description is adequate but could be more transparent about session scope.

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 with no wasted words: first sentence states purpose, second lists levels. Front-loaded with the key action.

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 single-parameter setter with no output schema, the description is complete. It provides the purpose, the parameter meaning, and the allowed values, enough for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

Input schema covers parameter 'level' with enum and description. The description adds value by listing the available levels in a readable format ('Available levels: debug, info, notice, warning, error, critical, alert, emergency'), reinforcing the allowed values beyond the schema enum.

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 verb 'Set' and the resource 'minimum logging level for MCP logging notifications', distinguishing it from sibling tool logging_status which reports the current level.

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 (to change the logging level) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use. The sibling tool logging_status is available for checking the current level, but no contrast is given.

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