start_blinker

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that the tool flashes the port LED, but it does not mention that the blinking persists until stopped, whether it requires privileges, or any other side effects.

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 three short sentences: action, purpose, and parameter. It front-loads the core behavior and wastes no words.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, effect, and parameter meaning. It omits only the lifecycle detail (that blinking continues until stop_blinker is called), but the sibling list makes that inferable.

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 0%, so the description must explain the only parameter. The Args section does exactly that: interface is identified as the Ethernet interface to blink, with the default eth0 repeated. It gives the parameter semantic meaning, though it doesn't add allowed values or validation constraints.

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 clear verb ('Start') and resource ('Ethernet port blinker'), then explains the physical effect: flashes the port LED to locate a cable. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like stop_blinker and get_blinker_status.

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 cable-finder explanation gives a concrete reason to use the tool and implies it is the start counterpart to stop_blinker. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but the intended context is unambiguous.

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