skylight_rename_device

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states 'Rename'. It does not disclose whether the operation is idempotent, reversible, or requires specific permissions. The lack of any behavioral context beyond the verb 'rename' leaves agents uncertain about side effects.

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 short sentence, which is concise but sacrifices useful detail. It is front-loaded but overly minimal; it could include parameter context or usage notes without becoming verbose.

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 lack of output schema and the presence of an undocumented 'frameId' parameter, the description fails to explain how renaming a device works in context (e.g., relationship to frames). It is incomplete for a tool with 3 parameters and no schema coverage for all.

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 coverage is 67% (2 of 3 parameters described). The description adds no parameter-specific info, but the schema already provides adequate descriptions for 'id' and 'name'. The undocumented 'frameId' parameter is not clarified, so the description does not fully compensate for the coverage gap.

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 'Rename a Skylight device' clearly states the action (rename) and resource (device), making it easy to understand the tool's core function. However, it does not differentiate it from similar tools like skylight_rename_frame, though the resources differ, so it's still clear.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives. Users are left to infer that it should be used to rename a device, but without context about when renaming is appropriate or how it differs from other rename operations.

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