set_security_status

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

The description only states the action without disclosing side effects, permissions, or consequences. Since annotations are absent, the description should cover behavioral traits like the need for a valid security code, potential system state changes, or error conditions.

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 with an inline mapping of secstatus values. No unnecessary words, and it front-loads the purpose.

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 sensitivity of a security panel and two required parameters, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the seccode parameter, return values (though output schema exists), or usage context like error handling. More details are needed for safe usage.

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 description explains the secstatus parameter values explicitly but does not mention the seccode parameter at all. With 0% schema coverage, the description must compensate, but it partially fails by omitting an important parameter.

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 sets the security panel status, and explains the meaning of the secstatus integer values (0=Disarm, 1=Arm Home, 2=Arm Away). This provides a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from the sibling 'get_security_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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or conditions. For example, it does not mention that the security code is required or hint at authorization needs.

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