pixoo_control_device

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

Annotations already indicate non-destructive (destructiveHint: false) and idempotent (idempotentHint: true). The description adds context: the tool reads state when called without params and returns state after changes when params are supplied. No contradictions, but no details on rate limits or authentication beyond the prerequisite.

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?

Two sentences: first lists capabilities, second explains usage modes. Every word is necessary, front-loaded with action, no fluff.

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 output schema exists (not shown but indicated in context signals), the description sufficiently covers prerequisites, usage modes, and parameter scope. It does not need to explain return values as the output schema handles that.

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 100% with each parameter already described (e.g., brightness range 0–100, channel enum values). The description restates the parameters without adding new semantics beyond grouping them and noting the read-vs-change behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 reads or changes device state, listing specific attributes (brightness, screen, channel, clock face). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pixoo_discover_devices and pixoo_display_text, which handle discovery and content display respectively.

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 explicitly explains when to call with no params (read only) versus with params (apply changes then read). It also provides a prerequisite: use pixoo_discover_devices first if PIXOO_IP is not configured, offering clear guidance on tool sequencing.

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