Vibrate pattern

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions forward to hardware, play pattern, and interruptibility, but omits side effects (e.g., immediate haptic feedback), idempotency, required permissions, or device state prerequisites.

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 efficient at two sentences, front-loading the action and hardware control context. It earns its place, though it could be structured with bullet points for readability.

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 4 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and hardware control, the description lacks details on repeat behavior (default?), actuator_index omission effects, and return values. The agent may misuse if not informed about these aspects.

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 50% (descriptions for device_id and steps only). The description adds no meaning beyond 'play a timed multi-step vibration pattern' and does not clarify repeat behavior, actuator_index usage, or intensity range validation.

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 plays a timed multi-step vibration pattern on physical hardware. It distinguishes itself from siblings (e.g., vibrate, oscillate) by specifying 'multi-step' and 'interruptible by any stop'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like vibrate (likely single-step) or other motion tools. No prerequisites or explicit when/when-not conditions are mentioned.

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