Activar o pausar el automático

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds useful context that the toggle affects an AI agent driving physical crop actuators, which is important for a mutation tool, but it does not spell out permissions, immediate effects, or failure behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter toggle.

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 simple toggle with annotations covering the safety profile, this is largely sufficient. However, because it changes autonomous control of actuators, the description could clarify immediate operational consequences and permission requirements.

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 50%; crop_id is documented in the schema, while enabled lacks a schema description. The description's 'activa o pausa' helps map enabled to the toggle state, but does not add detail about crop scope or side effects.

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 pair (activate/pause) and resource (the AI agent that drives crop actuators), so intent is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling commands like send_actuator_command, but the automation-level toggle is inferable.

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?

Gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives; it only states what the toggle does. An agent must infer that this is for enabling/disabling autonomous actuator control rather than issuing a direct command.

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