editor_set_editor_setting

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'Set an editor preference.' It does not disclose persistence, validation, permissions, reversibility, or other behavioral traits. This is a mutation tool with zero additional context.

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 a single, grammatically correct sentence and is front-loaded. However, it is under-specified, failing to convey necessary details about the parameters or usage context.

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?

The tool is a mutation with 2 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions. The description 'Set an editor preference' is grossly insufficient for an agent to understand what editor preferences are, what values are accepted, or how this differs from similar tools.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only implies that 'key' and 'value' refer to a preference name and its value. It does not explain what keys are valid, the expected value format, or provide examples.

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 'Set an editor preference' clearly states the action (set) and the resource (editor preference), distinguishing it from sibling tools like editor_set_project_setting. However, it is minimal and does not elaborate on what editor preferences are.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Many sibling tools such as editor_set_project_setting or editor_set_breakpoint exist, and the description gives no context for selecting this one.

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