calibrate_glasses

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and open-world effects (openWorldHint=true). The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as side effects, required device state, or result feedback.

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?

A single, concise sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's function. No superfluous content.

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 rich schema and annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return behavior (no output schema), failure modes, or expected outcomes, which is important for a mutation tool affecting device settings.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents parameters. The description lists three calibration types but does not add new insights beyond what the schema provides (e.g., parameter interactions or default behaviors). Baseline of 3 applies.

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 triggers calibration procedures for XREAL glasses, specifying three types (IPD, brightness, tracking). It uses a specific verb-resource combination and is distinct from sibling tools like 'set_tracking_mode' which are not calibration-focused.

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 on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or differentiate from related tools like 'set_tracking_mode' or 'configure_hand_gestures'.

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