tag_device

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

The description adds context beyond annotations: it mentions the 404 error for invalid device, case-sensitivity of tags, and lack of built-in tag listing. Aligns with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but lacks details on idempotency or duplicate tag behavior.

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 a single dense paragraph. While not overly long, it could benefit from bullet points or clearer separation of sections to improve scannability.

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?

The description lacks information about the tool's return value or success response. It only mentions a 404 error. For a mutating tool with no output schema, this is a notable gap in completeness.

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%, but the description enriches each parameter: explains action values ('add'/'remove'), gives device_id format and example, and provides tag string examples. Includes a full example call, adding substantial value beyond 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: add or remove a tag on a CPE device in GenieACS. It distinguishes between the two actions and explains tags are used for grouping devices, differentiating from sibling tools like search_devices and manage_preset.

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 explicitly tells when to use action='add' and action='remove', provides an example, and suggests using search_devices for verification. It mentions the device must exist and limitations, but does not explicitly list when not to use this tool versus alternatives.

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