ha_light_turn_on

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states the action ('turn on') without mentioning side effects, error handling (e.g., invalid entity_id), state transitions, or any required permissions. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the literal action.

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 immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It contains no filler or redundancy, making it well-structured and easily scannable.

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 the tool's low complexity, the description is incomplete: it lacks usage context, parameter format, and any note about errors or return behavior. The presence of sibling tools that could also turn on lights (e.g., ha_call_service) makes this minimal description insufficient for unambiguous agent selection and 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description merely repeats 'entity_id' without explaining its format, expected values (e.g., 'light.living_room'), or how to obtain it. The description fails to add meaning beyond the parameter name, which is insufficient given the lack of schema documentation.

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's function: turning on a light. The verb 'turn on' and resource 'light' are specific, and the phrase 'by entity_id' indicates the scope. It differentiates from sibling tools like ha_light_turn_off and ha_area_lights_on by focusing on a single light entity.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ha_area_lights_on or ha_call_service. There are no contextual cues about preferred use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the tool's appropriate usage.

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