homey_list_zones

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists zones and their hierarchy, implying a read-only operation, but it does not specify return format, pagination, error behavior, or authorization requirements. The description adds value with 'hierarchy' but remains limited.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and resource, adds a clarifying parenthetical, and includes the scope 'hierarchy'. There is no wasted wording or 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?

For a simple parameterless list tool, the description sufficiently indicates what the tool returns (zones and their hierarchy). Although no output schema exists, the description gives a reasonable overview, though it does not detail the exact structure of the hierarchy.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain beyond what the empty schema shows. Per the rubric, this situation merits a baseline of 4.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource 'zones' with clarifying detail '(rooms/floors)' and adds 'hierarchy', making it clearly distinct from sibling tools that focus on devices. It unambiguously states what the tool does.

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 when one needs zone information, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The purpose itself conveys the intended use.

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