boombox

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses two useful behavioral traits (firmware requirement, auto-wake), but does not mention potential side effects, failure modes, or whether the action is reversible. This is moderate disclosure for a simple command.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with a dash providing a secondary clause. Every word earns its place, and the key action is immediately clear.

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 tool with no required params and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, a hardware/firmware prerequisite, and a key behavior (auto-wake). It does not elaborate on optional parameters' runtime behavior, but those are fully documented in the schema.

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 already describes all parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-specific context beyond what is already in the schema, which is the baseline for high coverage.

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?

Clearly states the action ('Plays a fart sound') and the resource ('external speaker'), which is a specific and distinctive purpose. The sibling tools list shows no similar sound-playing tool, so it is well-differentiated.

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?

Provides a clear prerequisite (firmware 2022.40.25+) and a behavioral note (auto-wakes if asleep), giving context for when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no direct alternatives exist among siblings.

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