set_persistent_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the JSON-serializability constraint and provides a meaningful use case, but it does not state overwrite behavior, persistence lifetime, or error consequences. This is adequate but incomplete for a write operation.

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 sentences plus a clearly formatted argument list. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the core purpose. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description gives enough context: what it does, the data type, and a use case. It could mention that it overwrites existing slots or that it returns nothing, but the core is covered. Sibling get_persistent_data completes the picture.

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 argument list compensates well. It explains realm's allowed values, slot_name's purpose, and clarifies slot_value can be any JSON-serializable value (though the schema says string, which could imply stringified JSON). This adds strong meaning beyond raw parameter names.

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 resource ('value in an OBS persistent-data slot'), and the example of storing giveaway winners distinguishes it from sibling get_persistent_data. This is a specific, non-tautological statement of purpose.

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 gives a clear use case: 'useful for storing state the AI needs to remember across tool calls' with an example. It implies when to use versus get_persistent_data but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it loses one point.

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