Switch Device

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

Annotations already capture the mutation and idempotency profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true), so the description's additional context is moderate. It usefully discloses that playback can start after transfer via the play argument, but it does not mention preconditions such as the target device needing to be active or what happens on failure.

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 impressively compact, with the core action and prerequisite in one sentence and a minimal args list. Every line earns its place; there is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers the essential invocation context: what the tool does, how to find valid targets, and the one optional behavioral flag. It could mention device activity requirements or error cases, but the guidance to use list_devices mitigates that gap.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does by explaining device_id as the target device and play as 'Start playing after the transfer' with its default. This goes beyond the bare schema titles and gives the agent operational meaning for both arguments.

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 states a specific action ('Move playback') on a specific resource ('a different device'), which is unambiguous. It also points to list_devices, distinguishing it from playback-control siblings like control_playback. The vague title 'Switch Device' is clarified by the description.

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 clearly communicates the purpose and directs the agent to list_devices for finding target devices)Skip to content. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like control_playback or add_to_queue, but the context is clear enough for selecting this tool over unrelated siblings.

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