Set color temperature

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'Set', which is expected. It doesn't contradict annotations, but also doesn't disclose additional traits like what happens to existing settings or response format. With annotations present, a 3 is appropriate.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and scale, and includes the key parameter preference. There is zero redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 presence of an output schema and annotations covering safety, the description is fairly complete for a set operation. It could mention the effect on the device or reversibility, but those are not essential given the annotation coverage. The scale (0-100) is clarified, and the preferred parameter is highlighted.

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 schema already documents all three parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds value by stating that `idx` is preferred over `name`, which helps the agent choose between ambiguous identifiers. This extra guidance goes beyond the schema's static descriptions.

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 action ('Set') and the resource ('normalized white temperature'), with a specific range (0-100). It distinguishes itself from siblings like set_color_brightness by focusing on temperature, though it doesn't explicitly mention Domoticz or device context. It's clear enough for an agent to understand the core purpose.

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 offers only 'Preferred: idx', which is a parameter preference, not guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_color_brightness or other device controls. There is no mention of scenarios where this tool should be selected, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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