domotz_drivers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It details all eight actions and their required parameters, includes 'GOTCHAS' about workflow dependencies, and mentions the optional 'include_unrecoverable' flag. It does not describe side effects or permissions, but the action descriptions cover the main behavioral traits.

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 well-structured into sections: summary, action reference (bulleted), gotchas, and examples. It is front-loaded with the purpose, each sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy. The format is easy to parse for an AI agent.

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 complexity (8 actions, 8 parameters, no output schema), the description is comprehensive. It covers all actions, explains the workflow, and provides examples. It could mention the return format of each action, but the action reference and examples partially compensate. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for selecting and invoking the tool.

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 schema already describes each parameter. However, the description adds significant value by grouping parameters per action (e.g., 'list needs no parameters', 'create_association needs custom_driver_id + agent_id + device_id + body'), which goes beyond the schema's flat property descriptions.

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 custom drivers and their associations with devices', specifying the resource (custom drivers) and actions (list, get, create_association, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., domotz_agents, domotz_devices) by focusing on driver-specific operations.

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 includes a 'GOTCHAS' section with workflow guidance (list drivers first, then create_association) and clarifies that execute_action needs action_id from the driver definition. It provides examples for list and list_associations. While it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool vs alternatives, the action reference and context make it clear.

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