sonos_create_alarm

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states that an alarm is created and an ID returned, but omits details about side effects (e.g., what happens if an alarm with the same time already exists), required permissions, or any resource limitations. The 'create' action implies mutation, but the description does not elaborate on the scope or consequences.

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 concise with two short sentences, front-loading the action and return value. However, it could be more efficient by removing the misleading mention of 'music source' and aligning fully with the schema.

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?

The description specifies the return value (alarm ID), which is helpful. However, it lacks details on error handling, required device state, and does not leverage the sibling context to reference related tools. For a creation tool, it adequately conveys the basic purpose but leaves gaps in operational context.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 100%, the description introduces 'music source' as a parameter that does not appear in the input schema, which is misleading. The description does not add value beyond the schema definitions and even introduces an inconsistency, reducing clarity.

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 verb ('Create'), resource ('alarm'), and key aspects (time, days, music source, settings). It also specifies the return value (alarm ID). Among siblings like sonos_list_alarms, sonos_update_alarm, sonos_delete_alarm, this tool is distinctly identified as the creation one.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sonos_update_alarm for modifying an existing alarm). There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or context for use, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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