tv_display

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the mechanism (HTML generated and served locally) but does not disclose potential side effects like interrupting current TV usage, error handling, or requirements (TV on/connected).

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and concise. No wasted words; 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?

Given the complexity (multiple content types) and that an output schema exists, the description is fairly complete. It explains the tool's function and mechanism, though it could mention impact on current TV state.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with detailed examples for the 'data' parameter. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it just summarizes what content types are supported. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 turns the TV into a display for dashboards, messages, clocks, or any URL. It uses specific verbs and resources, and differentiates from sibling tools like tv_audio or tv_cast.

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 when to use the tool (to display custom content on TV) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives like tv_cast for streaming or tv_launch for apps.

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