tvh_probe_reception

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important destructive behavior: explicit tuner isolation temporarily disables competing enabled frontends, requires an idle server/no imminent DVR, and journals and restores prior settings. It also covers crash recovery and read-only blocking, giving the agent strong operational context.

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 definition is front-loaded with the core purpose and then adds necessary operational caveats. It is dense but appropriate for a complex destructive probing tool, with little obvious filler.

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 tool's complexity, destructive annotations, and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the critical prerequisites, side effects, recovery path, and read-only restriction. An agent has enough information to decide whether and how to invoke it safely.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It adequately explains tuner_uuid selection/isolation, the preview-vs-run distinction via its opening phrase, and bounds duration and max_bytes, though it does not explicitly document every parameter name or default.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: previewing or running a bounded service MPEG-TS test. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools such as tvh_reception_recoveries by focusing on active reception probing with explicit duration and size bounds.

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?

It explains key usage conditions: omitting tuner_uuid lets Tvheadend choose the receiver, while supplying one isolates that tuner. It also states active probing is blocked in read-only mode and points to reception_recoveries after crashes, though it does not comprehensively compare against every alternative sibling.

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