shelly_light_set

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the idempotentHint annotation: it notes that only provided fields are changed (incremental update), is audit-logged, and returns the post-action LightState. No contradiction with annotations.

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 (few sentences) and front-loaded: it begins with the core purpose and then breaks down parameters. However, it mixes range explanations and notes, and could be more structured with bullet points or clearer sections.

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 complexity (8 parameters, optional fields) and the presence of an output schema (not shown but noted), the description covers the main behavior and return value. It lacks detailed parameter explanations and does not explain the channel parameter or transition_s, which could lead to incomplete agent understanding.

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 partially compensates by explaining brightness (0-100), rgb (three 0-255 values), temp_k (white temperature). However, it omits details for on, white, channel, transition_s, and the exact format of rgb array. This leaves gaps for an agent.

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 sets a light/dimmer/RGB(W)/CCT channel, specifying it works for both Gen1 and Gen2 devices. It distinguishes from sibling tools like shelly_switch_set (switches) and shelly_cover_move (covers), so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 by listing updatable fields and giving parameter ranges (brightness 0-100, rgb three values, temp_k). It does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or mention alternatives, but sibling tools cover different domains (switches, covers, scripts, etc.), making the context clear.

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