dim_for_attention

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the slow dimming behavior and state restoration, but lacks details like duration, rate, or side effects on other lights. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 the tool has one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the main behavior and restoration. However, it could benefit from clarifying scope (e.g., if no lights specified, does it apply to all?) or duration. Still, fairly complete for a simple interaction.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the input schema for the single parameter 'light_names'. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description merely repeats the parameter name without clarifying its semantics (e.g., default behavior when null).

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 (slowly dim lights), the resource (lights), and the purpose (get attention without being jarring). It also mentions restoring original state, distinguishing it from more flashy sibling tools like flash_lights or pulse_lights.

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 usage for subtle attention-getting but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No when-not conditions or explicit sibling differentiation provided.

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