set_node_property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals a key behavior: setting a property to its default effectively removes it (only non-default values are stored). It also mentions that properties vary by node type, which is useful context. No contradictions occur.

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?

Four sentences, each serving a purpose: main action, property variability, viewing alternative, and behavioral nuance (default removal). No redundant or unnecessary information. The key point is front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (4 required parameters, no output schema), the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, parameter hints, behavioral nuance, and a pointer to a complementary tool. It is fully adequate for agent usage.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by providing examples of property names (Seed, Duration, Scale, Style) and value types (number, string, boolean, object). It also notes that property names are case-sensitive, which is not in the schema. This goes beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 ('a property value on a node'). It distinguishes from sibling tools: get_node_details for viewing properties and remove_node for removing nodes. The examples of common properties further clarify the tool's 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 advises using get_node_details to check current properties, which helps in deciding when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for other modification tasks (e.g., removing a node).

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