scene_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing behavioral requirements: the mandatory user interaction for mode selection, the prerequisite step of showing current lights, and the distinction from update operations. It doesn't mention error conditions or response format, but covers key behavioral constraints.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: the first states the action, the second provides usage rules, the third gives prerequisites, and the fourth specifies exclusions. It could be slightly more concise by combining some instructions.

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 creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides strong contextual completeness. It covers when to use, prerequisites, behavioral constraints, and sibling differentiation. The main gap is lack of information about return values or error cases, but given the good usage guidance, it's mostly complete.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal parameter semantics beyond the schema - it emphasizes that mode 'MUST be asked from user before saving' but doesn't provide additional meaning for name, entity_ids, or icon. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Create a NEW scene') and resource ('in Home Assistant'), distinguishing it from siblings like scene_update for updates. It explicitly defines the scope as new scene creation only, not updates.

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: 'ONLY call when user EXPLICITLY asks to create/save a NEW scene' and 'Do NOT call this to update existing scenes - use scene_update for that.' It also specifies prerequisites (show current lights, ask for mode) and names the alternative tool (scene_update).

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