press_bot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It provides key transient behavior by stating that the finger extends then retracts, making clear that this is a momentary action rather than a toggle or sustained activation. It does not cover errors or prerequisites, but those are less critical for such a simple command.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It leads with the action, describes the resource, and adds the mechanical consequence of the press in as few words as possible.

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?

For a one-parameter, simple action tool, the description plus schema adequately explains what the tool does, what it acts on, and what physical behavior occurs. It is sufficient for selecting and invoking the tool, though it does not mention the return value or behavior when the device is unavailable.

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 input schema already fully describes deviceId as 'Device ID or device name of the Bot' with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond referring to the Bot, so the schema carries the semantic weight and the score remains at the baseline.

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 identifies a specific action ('Send a momentary press') and a specific resource ('SwitchBot Bot (finger simulator)'), and clarifies the physical result ('finger extends then retracts'). It clearly differentiates the tool from sibling tools such as turn_on, turn_off, and the various status/read tools.

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 phrase 'momentary press' implies the right use case: a short, self-reverting button activation rather than a sustained on/off state change. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention exclusions, so the usage guidance is only implied.

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