scene_configure

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates this is a configuration/setup tool that establishes connection parameters, but doesn't disclose behavioral details like whether configuration persists across sessions, what happens on invalid credentials, or error handling. It adds some context about the environment variable alternative but lacks operational details.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste - the first states the purpose, the second provides critical usage guidance. Every word earns its place, and the most important information (that this is required before using other tools) is front-loaded in the second sentence.

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 configuration tool with 2 parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description provides adequate context about its role in the tool ecosystem. It explains the prerequisite relationship with sibling tools and mentions alternative configuration methods. However, without annotations or output schema, it could benefit from more behavioral details about what 'configure' actually does operationally.

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 description coverage is 100%, providing complete documentation for both parameters (url and token). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without adding extra semantic value.

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 specific action ('Configure the Home Assistant connection') and resource ('for the Scene MCP server'), distinguishing it from all sibling tools which perform scene operations rather than configuration. It explicitly identifies this as a setup/initialization tool.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Required before using other scene_ tools if not already configured via environment variables.' It clearly states the prerequisite relationship with sibling tools and mentions the alternative configuration method (environment variables).

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