home_light

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It indicates mutation by 'control' but omits side effects, error handling (e.g., setting conflicting parameters like RGB and color temperature), idempotency, or prerequisites (device availability, permissions).

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?

A single concise sentence front-loads the core purpose and enumerates key capabilities. No redundancy or unnecessary words.

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?

Despite good parameter coverage, the description fails to mention the required entity_id parameter or explain return behavior (no output schema). It does not address combinations of parameters or device-specific constraints, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 80% (4 of 5 params described). The description maps actions and parameters (e.g., 'color temperature' to color_temp_kelvin) but adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions. The entity_id parameter is not mentioned in the description, relying on the 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 tool controls a light with specific operations (on/off/toggle, brightness, color temperature, RGB). It differentiates from sibling tools like home_climate or home_vacuum by naming the exact capability.

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 lists operations but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like home_get_state (reading state) or home_scene (preset scenes). The context of sibling tools implies light-specific control, but no exclusionary guidance is provided.

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