set_light

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states that it changes a light's state and which properties can be set, but it does not disclose auth requirements, whether setting color_hex conflicts with xy coordinates, what happens when on=false with brightness/color, or side effects.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then lists controllable aspects efficiently. Every sentence adds value.

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 6-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It does not clarify whether only light_id can be sent, how color_hex interacts with xy coordinates, whether brightness applies when turning off, or what auth/state prerequisites exist.

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 a little context by noting color can be a hex string or xy coordinates and giving an example, but it does not explain precedence or interaction between color_hex and color_xy_x/y 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 ('Set') and resource ('a specific Hue light's state') and enumerates what can be controlled. The word 'specific' distinguishes it from set_all_lights, but it does not explicitly identify or contrast sibling tools.

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 this tool is for controlling one light rather than all lights, but it gives no explicit 'when to use this vs. alternatives' guidance. It does not mention set_all_lights, set_scene, or other sibling tools, nor any exclusions.

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