fire_tv_command

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, but it fails to mention side effects, confirmation requirements, or the meaning of parameters like 'risk' and 'confirmed_by_user'. The description is too sparse to inform the agent about potential consequences or prerequisites.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and object, making it easy to scan. However, its brevity comes at the cost of omitting essential details, so it is efficient but under-specified.

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 tool's complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. An agent would not know how to handle 'risk' or 'confirmed_by_user', nor what the tool returns, making it insufficient for reliable invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It only illustrates valid values for 'command' (Pause, Rewind, Back, Home, Play) but leaves 'risk', 'transition_delay', and 'confirmed_by_user' completely unexplained, which is inadequate for a 4-parameter tool.

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 clear verb 'Execute' with a specific resource ('one direct remote command') and provides concrete examples (Pause, Rewind, Back, Home, Play) that make the tool's function understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this from the sibling tool fire_tv_press, which likely overlaps in functionality.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fire_tv_press or fire_tv_launch, nor any mention of prerequisites or context. The description simply states what it does, not when to choose it.

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