List Devices

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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, the description adds useful behavioral context by noting that it returns live sensor/state values and that filters use partial matching. This goes beyond the annotation baseline, though it does not disclose every potential behavior (e.g., pagination).

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by useful filter instructions. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant or filler content.

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 that there is no output schema, the description appropriately enumerates the returned fields. The tool is simple (two optional filters), and the description covers purpose, filters, and output, making it complete for this low-complexity tool.

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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage for both parameters with descriptions, giving a baseline of 3. The tool description adds extra value by giving concrete examples (e.g., 'kitchen', 'light') and explicitly stating the partial match behavior, which enriches the meaning beyond the schema.

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 lists all Homey devices with current capability values, using a specific verb and resource. It also specifies the returned fields, making it distinct from a generic listing. Although it doesn't explicitly mention sibling tools, its scope is unambiguous.

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 clear context on how to use the optional filters ('zone' and 'class') and even explains partial matching behavior. However, it does not mention when to prefer this over the sibling 'search_devices' tool, so it lacks explicit alternatives or exclusions.

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