set_brightness

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond the basic operation, such as whether changes are persistent or reversible, permission requirements, or side effects like turning off lights when brightness is 0. Since no annotations are provided, the description bears the full burden but fails to disclose these traits.

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 extremely concise, using only two sentences to convey purpose and parameters. While it could include more behavioral details, it avoids unnecessary repetition and is front-loaded with the essential action.

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?

The description covers the basic purpose and parameters but misses details like error handling (e.g., out-of-range brightness, invalid light names) and return value structure. Given that the tool has an output schema, return values are somewhat covered, but the behavior when light_names is null (i.e., all lights) is only implied.

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 the valid range (0-100) for brightness and clarifies that light_names is optional, which supplements the input schema's type and default. However, with 0% schema description coverage, the description does not provide rich semantic detail like why brightness might have a cap or how light_names interact with the function.

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), resource (lights), and scope (all or specified). This verb+resource+scope combination effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_mood_lighting or set_temperature, which affect different properties.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like dim_for_attention or flash_lights, which might also affect brightness. The description does not mention when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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