save_vibe

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explains that the tool captures and persists a snapshot, but it does not disclose whether saving over an existing name overwrites it, or mention any authentication requirements or side effects beyond persistence.

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?

Two concise sentences state the action, the object, and the purpose without any filler. The key verb and resource are front-loaded, making the tool's function immediately clear.

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 simple schema with comprehensive parameter descriptions, the definition is largely complete for calling the tool. It lacks only a note about handling duplicate names or error cases, but these are not essential for basic invocation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by reinforcing that the parameters represent a snapshot, but it does not add syntax-level details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('Save') and clearly defines the resource ('current light state as a named vibe'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like apply_saved_vibe by emphasizing the capture/save action and future re-application, so an agent can tell them apart.

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 clearly communicates the use case: saving a snapshot of light settings to re-apply later. The schema adds practical guidance to use list_lights first to obtain current state, but no explicit alternative or exclusion is mentioned.

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