Reload all automations from YAML

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

With annotations already covering idempotentHint, destructiveHint, and readOnlyHint, the description still adds real value: it discloses that it calls the automation.reload service, that it re-reads automations.yaml/packages, re-applies enabled/disabled state, and pulls in config-store automations. It stops short of noting what in-memory state might be discarded, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action in the first sentence, followed by useful elaboration. The 'Returns:' sentence is somewhat redundant given a dedicated output schema exists, but otherwise the text is tight and well-ordered.

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 zero-parameter tool with full annotation coverage and an output schema, the description supplies everything an agent needs: the mechanism (automation.reload), the data sources re-read, and the interaction with automations_set_automation_config. Return values are already covered by the output schema.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter surface for the description to clarify or obscure.

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+resource+scope ('Reload all automations from YAML') and proceeds to name the underlying service. It is cleanly distinguishable from sibling reload tools such as automations_reload_scripts and automations_reload_scenes, which target different resources.

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?

Usage context is implied (use after automations are created/edited in YAML or via automations_set_automation_config) but never stated as an explicit when-to-use rule. It doesn't contrast this tool with alternatives such as automations_set_automation_config, services_reload_config, or system_reload_all, so the agent must infer the choice.

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