set_power

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

Annotations already disclose that the tool is mutating, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond those annotations by noting that turning the light on restores its previous state, which is important for understanding the effect of the operation.

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 two short sentences and is front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence adds useful meaning without unnecessary detail.

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 one-parameter power tool with annotations covering safety and idempotency, and with an output schema present, the description is complete enough. It explains the action and the key state-restoration behavior an agent needs to know.

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 for the single `on` boolean parameter is 0%, so the description must carry the semantic burden. It does this well by explaining that the parameter controls on/off state and that `on` restores prior behavior.

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 precise verb and resource: turning the light on or off. This is clearly distinct from sibling commands such as set_brightness, set_color, and set_effect, which adjust other light attributes rather than power state.

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 on/off use case is implied by the description, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like get_light or scene recall, and no stated exclusions. It is adequate but leaves the agent to infer usage context.

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