setDeviceLed

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

destructiveHint=true already flags this as a mutation and the description is consistent with it — setting device state is genuinely a change. The description adds the three LED mode semantics but nothing further (e.g., operational impact of disabling a status LED, or behavior when the MAC is not found). With annotations covering the safety profile, a 3 is fair.

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 15-word sentence with the verb front-loaded and zero filler. Every word contributes: the action, the resource, the allowed states, and the addressing mechanism.

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 three-parameter state-set tool with destructiveHint=true and no output schema, the description gives the essential operational picture: what is set, the possible values, and how the target is identified. The only notable omission is siteId semantics; otherwise nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 only 33% (ledSetting is described). The description compensates for deviceMac ('by its MAC address') and ledSetting ('on/off/site-default' matching 0/1/2), but siteId is left completely unexplained — the agent cannot tell why or when it is needed, which is a real gap at this coverage level.

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 names a concrete verb+resource ('Set the LED'), enumerates the three valid modes (on/off/site-default), and identifies the target via MAC address. This clearly differentiates it from mutation siblings like setSwitchPortStatus or setSwitchPortPoe without needing to open 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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when siteId should be supplied. There are no context cues, exclusions, or mention of prerequisites such as the device needing to be adopted or online, so the agent must infer usage entirely from the name and schema.

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