prepare_bed

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only and destructive; the description adds real value beyond them by stating it acts immediately, applies the routine's saved power choice, and overrides a paused schedule while requiring explicit user intent. It omits side effects on the physical device and error behavior for an unknown routine_id.

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 front-loaded sentences: action first, then the intent/paused-schedule constraint. No filler, though the second sentence is slightly dense and could be split for scanning.

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 one-parameter mutating tool with destructive/open-world hints and no output schema, the description covers what it changes, where the values come from, and the intent requirement. Remaining gaps are minor (return values, failure modes).

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 single parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description carries the burden. It explains that routine_id refers to a saved routine whose target/temperature/power are applied, but does not say whether the ID is a string handle, name, or where to obtain it (e.g., from list_routines).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Run a saved temperature routine immediately by routine_id') and clarifies what values are applied (target, temperature, saved power choice). This clearly separates it from list_routines/update_routine, though those siblings are not named explicitly.

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?

Gives clear usage context with 'immediately' and 'requires user intent... even if the recurring schedule is paused', which tells the agent this is an intent-driven action and not the scheduler. No explicit exclusions or named alternatives, keeping it short of a 5.

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