flix_discover_devices

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the core behavior—discovering devices on the local network—which is transparent enough for a scan-like operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., network traffic, time taken) or return format, though the timeout parameter in the schema partially hints at scanning behavior.

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 with no wasted words. It clearly conveys the tool's purpose without elaboration, achieving maximum conciseness while remaining informative.

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 low complexity (only one optional parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description is mostly adequate. It tells the agent what the tool does, and the schema handles the parameter. However, it does not state what the tool returns, which might be useful, but the purpose 'discover devices' implicitly suggests a list of devices is returned. Overall, it's complete enough for the simple context.

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 schema description covers the single parameter (timeout) at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it only repeats the 'discover' concept, and the timeout's purpose is already described in 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 action ('Discover') and the resource ('Flix devices in the local network'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like flix_get_device (which retrieves a specific device) and flix_pair_device (which pairs). The verb and scope are specific.

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 for discovering devices on the local network, providing a clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., to get a single device, use flix_get_device) nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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