set_seat_heat

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose a key behavior—'auto-wakes if asleep'—which is useful, but it omits other relevant behavioral details such as whether the command is async, requires authentication, or has side effects.

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 that front-loads the purpose and includes the most important parameter semantics. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description provides essential info (level scale, auto-wake) but does not explain what happens after setting (e.g., how long heat persists, whether any seats have restrictions). Given the schema covers parameter details, this is adequate but not fully complete.

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 covers all 5 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by explicitly mapping the 'level' values (0=off, 1=low, 2=medium, 3=high), which goes beyond the schema's generic 'Heat level 0-3'.

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 verb ('Sets'), the resource ('heating level for a specific seat'), and provides the scale (0=off, 1=low, 2=medium, 3=high). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_seat_cool and other climate controls.

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 purpose implies usage for heating a seat, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_seat_cool. No exclusions or conditional context are provided, so the usage is only implied.

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