xbox_media

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It never states that this is a mutating action, whether it fails if nothing is playing, whether it requires the console to be awake or authenticated, or what happens on an invalid command — all material for a control tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with the key verb and resource first. The enumerated command list duplicates the schema's enum verbatim, which is mild redundancy, but it does help an agent recognize capability at a glance.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should say at minimum what state is required (console on, media app running) and how failures surface. It covers only the action surface and leaves all operational context to guesswork.

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%: both `ip` and `command` are documented in the schema, including the same command list the description repeats. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema (no format details, no defaults, no behavior per command), so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Controls media playback on the console') and enumerates exactly which actions are possible, which clearly separates it from siblings like xbox_button (button presses) and xbox_volume (audio level). An agent can identify the tool's job without opening the schema.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this over xbox_button or xbox_launch, no prerequisites (console powered on, a media app active, auth required), and no note on which command to prefer when, e.g., 'pause' vs 'playpause'. The usage is only implied by the tool name.

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