toggle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the state-flipping behavior and the full-brightness action, which is core. However, it omits details like what happens with an invalid id, whether it returns the new state, or any side effects like state persistence. For a simple tool, the disclosed behavior is reasonably transparent but not exhaustive.

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 two short sentences, immediately front-loading the action and providing precise conditions. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff 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 toggle tool, the description covers the core state transition but lacks any mention of return values, error handling, or prerequisites (e.g., device existence, connectivity). Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is somewhat incomplete but adequate for basic usage.

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 0% and the description does not mention the 'id' parameter at all. Although the tool name implies 'id' is the device identifier, the description fails to explicitly connect the parameter to the toggle action, leaving the user to infer its meaning. The description does not compensate for the sparse schema.

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: 'Toggle a device on or off' with specific behavioral details ('If on, turns off. If off, turns on at full brightness'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_device or set_level by indicating the specific toggle behavior and the full-brightness default.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The description does not mention alternatives or scenarios where toggle is preferred over set_device or set_level. The context of toggling is implied but not stated for usage decisions.

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