set_variable

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains data types and dtype options, including complex numbers, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., overwriting behavior), permissions, or error handling. The 'create or overwrite' phrasing is helpful but incomplete.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action. It uses bullet-like formatting for details, but could be more structured (e.g., separating parameter descriptions). No irrelevant content.

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 input schema and lack of annotations, the description covers data types and dtype comprehensively. It does not explain return values, but an output schema exists (context signal), so this is acceptable for a variable-setting tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant value by explaining valid data formats (number, boolean, list, matrix) and dtype options. However, it does not explain the 'name' parameter beyond the schema's type string, missing an opportunity.

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's action: 'Create or overwrite a workspace variable.' The verb 'set' and resource 'variable' are explicit, and the purpose is distinct from siblings like get_variable (read) and list_variables (list).

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 for storing data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. No guidance on prerequisites or context is provided, though the purpose is clear from sibling tool names.

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