fibaro_quick_app

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only lists operations without mentioning side effects, authentication needs, error handling, or return behavior. For a tool that includes destructive operations like delete, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence that lists all operations without any redundant phrases. Every word carries meaning, and it is front-loaded for quick 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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, multiple operations), the description is incomplete. It lacks information about return values, error conditions, required permissions, and operation-specific behavior. The agent would not have enough context to use the tool correctly in many scenarios.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the input schema already provides for each parameter. While the schema descriptions are complete, the tool description itself contributes no extra parameter context.

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 purpose as a 'Quick App intent tool' and enumerates all supported operations (list, create, update code, update variables, get lua, delete). This provides a specific verb+resource combination and differentiates it from sibling tools like fibaro_device or fibaro_scene.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools are listed but without any comparative context or conditions for selection. No when-not-to-use scenarios are mentioned.

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