trigger_speedtest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits on its own. It explains the two test types, but gives no information about side effects, whether the operation is asynchronous, expected duration, or any necessary prerequisites. This is a gap for a trigger action that likely has operational impact.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose sentence. The parameter explanations are organized and free of any unnecessary text. Every sentence contributes to understanding how to use the tool.

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?

With only two parameters, both explained, the description covers the essentials. However, it omits operational context such as whether the speed test runs in the background, how results are returned (though an output schema exists), or any prerequisites like device connectivity. This is adequate but leaves some gaps for a trigger tool with no annotations.

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 provides no descriptions, but the description explains both parameters well: device_id is 'The Orb device ID to run the speed test on,' and test_type clarifies the meaning of 'content' and 'top'. This adds meaningful value over the bare schema and fully compensates for the 0% schema 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Trigger a speed test on an Orb Cloud device.' This is distinct from sibling tools like list_devices or get_device_telemetry, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies the use case: when you need to run a speed test on an Orb Cloud device. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but no sibling tool performs this function, so the context is clear. There are no exclusions or prerequisites stated, but the purpose is sufficient for tool selection.

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