set_white

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing that this is a safe, repeatable setter. The description adds the practical note to check get_light for the supported range, but says nothing about what happens to the tint or brightness defaults or whether it overrides color settings.

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?

Two short sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the range-lookup hint second. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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?

The tool is simple, with one required parameter and an output schema available, so the description does not need to explain return values. The main gap is the lack of a warning about interaction with set_color or set_brightness, but the definition is otherwise complete enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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 67%, and the schema itself provides examples for kelvin (tungsten, daylight) and explains tint and brightness ranges. The description only restates 'colour temperature' and adds no detail on how the parameters combine or what valid values exist beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('set white light by colour temperature'), which distinguishes it from siblings like set_color and set_brightness. It is clear what the tool does, though the distinction from the nearby set_color and set_effect tools is only implicit.

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?

It provides one useful pointer, telling the agent to use get_light to discover the model's supported range. However, it gives no guidance on when to use this instead of set_color or how it interacts with set_brightness, leaving alternatives to inference.

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