ledfx_power

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects (e.g., stopping effects, disconnecting users), whether the action is immediate, if confirmation is needed, or if repeated calls are safe. This is a significant gap for a power action tool.

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 a single sentence, concise and front-loaded. It contains no fluff, but it omits important behavioral details. It earns its place by stating the purpose clearly, but could be expanded slightly without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description should at least cover behavioral transparency and usage guidance. It fails to provide context about effects, safety, or when to invoke. The agent cannot fully assess the tool's impact from this description alone.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. According to guidelines, baseline is 3 when schema_coverage is high, and the description does not improve on it.

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 tool's purpose as 'Shutdown or restart LedFX', specifying the action and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that deal with effects, scenes, virtuals, etc., which are unrelated to power management.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no warnings about when not to use it, and no mention of related tools. The agent is left to infer context from the name alone.

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