Manage Radios (Z-Wave / Zigbee / Matter / Thread)

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true. Description adds: destructive actions need confirm=True, long-running actions start and return with long_running=true, and S2 secure inclusion is not scriptable. These details go beyond the annotation signal.

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?

Description is appropriately sized — three paragraphs with front-loaded purpose and distinction. Every sentence adds meaningful information; no redundancy or fluff.

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 (multiple radios, many actions, destructive/long-running behaviors, and output schema existing), the description covers when to use, behavioral caveats, error handling (unknown action returns list), and non-scriptable cases. No gaps remain.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining that an unknown action returns the supported list for that radio, and that params are action-specific (e.g., code, pin). This extra context justifies above baseline.

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 'Manage Home Assistant radios — Z-Wave, Zigbee, Matter, and Thread' and distinguishes read-only inspection (prefer other tools) from write actions. It uses specific verb+resource and differentiates from sibling tools like ha_get_device and ha_get_system_health.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool (writes and ping probe) versus alternatives (read-only inspection via ha_get_device/h_get_system_health). Also provides caveats: destructive actions require confirm=True, long-running actions return immediately, and interactive S2 inclusion is not scriptable.

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