tv_state

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that unsupplied fields are returned as None and that it returns a snapshot. This adds some behavioral context, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or side effects, which are important for a read tool.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence states purpose and key fields, the second adds behavioral detail and usage context. No fluff or redundancy.

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 one optional parameter, existence of an output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers all essential aspects: what data is returned (playback, volume, input, power), that it's a snapshot, and how missing fields are handled. Fully adequate for selection and invocation.

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% with a clear parameter description ('Target TV name. Omit for default TV.'). The tool description does not add further meaning about the parameter beyond hinting at the output, so the baseline of 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 gets 'unified live TV state' and lists specific fields (playback, volume, input, power). It distinguishes from siblings like tv_volume or tv_power by emphasizing it's a single composite snapshot, and mentions 'agent branching' to differentiate from tv_state_watch.

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 implicitly guides usage by saying 'Returns a single snapshot for agent branching,' which implies one-off state retrieval for decision-making. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like tv_state_watch for continuous monitoring, leaving some ambiguity.

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