power_off

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

Annotations already declare this as mutating (readOnlyHint=false), idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the specific behavioral nuance that the action puts the device into standby, not a hard power cut. This is useful context beyond the raw annotations, and there is no contradiction.

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 short sentence with zero filler. The action is front-loaded, and the standby clarification is parenthetical and efficient. Every word earns its place.

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?

This is a simple, zero-parameter command with no output schema. The description fully explains what the tool does and its effect. There is no missing information that an agent would need to call it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema fully documents the calling surface. With 0 params, the baseline is 4, and the description has no obligation to explain parameter meaning.

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 uses a specific verb ('Eteint' = turns off), a specific resource ('Denon AVR'), and a mode ('standby'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like power_on, volume_set, and get_status without ambiguity.

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 makes the intended use evident: powering off the Denon AVR. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclude other tools, but the sibling context is unambiguous—there is no competing tool for turning off the device. A clear context with no exclusions merits a 4.

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