set_button_mapping

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that dry_run defaults to true (shows before/after) and that auto-backup occurs before any real write. This gives the agent awareness of safety mechanisms. Missing details on authentication or rate limits, but adequate for a mutation tool.

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?

Two well-structured sentences, no filler. Every sentence adds value: first defines the operation and key parameter condition, second describes safety defaults. Front-loaded with the core 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 9 parameters (4 required) and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the key behavioral aspects and the most critical parameter conditions. However, it omits explanations for many scalar parameters (host, press, params). Moderate completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the conditional meaning of 'entity_id' and the purpose of 'dry_run'. However, it does not explain 7 other parameters (host, press, params, etc.), leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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'), the resource ('physical-button -> command binding'), and the scope ('activity' or 'remote'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'bulk_set_button_mapping' (bulk) and 'get_button_mapping' (read).

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 provides explicit usage context: entity_id is required for activities and ignored for remotes. It also mentions the default dry_run=true for preview, which guides safe usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool in favor of alternatives.

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