set_cell_layout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly: it reveals that h is not in column units, gives the exact pixel formula h*10+(h-1)*20, the 44px header, and chart padding behavior, plus worked examples. This is far beyond a generic mutation warning.

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 long but dense and front-loaded with its purpose. Every sentence contributes either a formula, a constraint, or a concrete example; the structure makes the complex sizing behavior easier to apply, not harder.

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 geometry-heavy tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is nearly complete: it covers units, limits, header/padding, and examples. It only omits obvious selection semantics for buffer_id/cell_id and what happens outside grid mode, which are minor given the opening sentence.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description compensates well by defining x/y/w/h as integers in the react-grid-layout grid and explaining the width/height constraints. buffer_id and cell_id are left to name inference, so it is not a full 5.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'Position a single cell in grid mode.' It immediately distinguishes this tool from layout-mode or cell-mode siblings, and the rest of the text reinforces that this is about geometry.

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?

It tells the agent this is for positioning one cell in grid mode and warns that the 12-column rule only constrains width. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as set_layout_mode or set_cell_mode, but the stated grid-mode context is clear enough to route most calls.

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