Set ADT Thermostat

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true). The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the call is gated on a one-use confirmation token from a prior tool, which explains the non-idempotent nature and implies token expiry/reuse failure modes.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and appends the gating precondition. No filler, and every clause carries operative information.

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?

With an output schema present and 100% schema description coverage, the description needn't explain returns or field formats. The critical missing piece an agent would want, exact confirmation-token acquisition flow, is at least pointed at via the named sibling tool.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds value beyond the schema by specifying units (Fahrenheit) that the schema omits and characterizing the setpoints as bounded, aligning with the 45-95 ranges. It doesn't spell out the auto/heat/cool branch structure explicitly.

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?

States a specific verb (Change), resource (thermostat), and scope (mode and bounded Fahrenheit setpoints), and names the upstream sibling prepare-security-action that gates the call. It distinguishes the tool from generic siblings, though it doesn't contrast against other security actions beyond the token dependency.

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?

Gives a clear precondition: it must be called only after prepare-security-action has returned a matching confirmation token. There is no explicit when-not or alternative-selection guidance, but the precondition is the dominant usage rule for this tool.

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