apply_scene

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing the operation order and that missing targets are skipped. It also exposes the dry_run behavior in the schema, which is a significant transparency feature. It could go further by mentioning failure modes or prerequisites like an existing scene, but the core behavior is well disclosed.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that packs the action, the order of operations, and the skip behavior without any wasted words. Every clause adds useful information.

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 multi-step, state-changing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential behavior and order. It explains the side-effect sequence and skip behavior, though it does not mention error conditions or prerequisites such as the scene needing to exist.

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%, so parameters are already well documented in the schema. The description adds operation ordering context but does not need to elaborate on individual parameters; the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a precise action ('Apply a saved scene') and enumerates the exact operations performed: resolve device hint, transfer playback, set volume/shuffle/repeat, and start the saved context. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like save_scene, list_scenes, and delete_scene.

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 makes it clear this tool is for applying an already-saved scene, which is a distinct context from saving, listing, or deleting scenes. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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