Reload automations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real value: it discloses the underlying service call and the write-permission prerequisite. It does not explain failure modes or whether in-flight automations are interrupted, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Two tight sentences with the action, mechanism, and prerequisite front-loaded; there is no filler or redundancy.

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 no-output mutation tool with annotations covering the safety profile, the description covers purpose, mechanism, and the key gating prerequisite. It omits what happens on failure or whether running automations are affected, which is a minor gap.

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 100% and the single instance_id parameter is fully documented in the schema, including its cross-home refusal behavior. The description adds no parameter-level information, 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 (reload automations) and distinguishes itself from the broader restart operation by noting it happens 'without restarting Home Assistant'. The parenthetical naming the underlying service (automation.reload) removes any ambiguity about what actually executes.

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 gives clear context for when this is the right call (after config changes, without a full restart) and adds a prerequisite, 'Requires writes to be enabled'. It does not, however, name alternatives such as ha_check_config or ha_trigger_automation, so it falls short of a 5.

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