Reload domain configuration

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

Annotations already declare non-readonly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the call carries no data payload and the purpose is picking up on-disk YAML changes without a restart. It does not contradict any annotation, though it stops short of discussing error behavior if the domain is invalid.

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, then cleanly segmented into mechanism, 'Use when', 'Not for', and 'Returns'. Every line carries distinct information with no padding.

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 single-parameter mutation tool, the description covers action, mechanism, selection criteria, alternative routing, and even the return value (redundant given the output schema, but harmless). Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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% and the schema already gives examples, so baseline is 3. The description goes further by explaining what the parameter actually does semantically — it maps to the `<domain>.reload` service — and adds 'input_boolean' as an example not present in the schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Reload one domain's configuration from disk') and explains the mechanism ('calls `<domain>.reload` over HTTP with no data'). An agent can distinguish it from sibling reload tools like automations_reload_automations or themes_reload_themes.

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?

Explicit 'Use when' clause (applying YAML changes for automations, scripts, scenes, input helpers without restarting HA) and an explicit 'Not for' clause that routes the agent to helpers_reload_helpers. This is the full when/when-not/alternative pattern.

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