all_relays_off

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

The description discloses '发完即走不等应答，直接读状态确认' (fire-and-forget, confirm via status read), revealing non-blocking behavior. It also mentions internal use of SET_RELAY_MASK, adding implementation context. With no annotations, this behavioral information is valuable and goes beyond a basic description.

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 compact with four short sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: the core action, execution model, performance advantage, and natural language mapping. There is no redundant or filler 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?

For a simple one-command tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, behavior, and usage hints. It lacks explicit details about return values or prerequisites like an active connection, but these are reasonable gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The input schema already provides full documentation for the optional address parameter, including range and examples. The description doesn't add any additional parameter-specific meaning, but schema coverage is 100%, 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?

Description states '一键断开全部继电器' (one-click disconnect all relays), with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like all_relays_on and disconnect_relay by indicating a bulk all-off action.

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 notes '比逐路操作快 N 倍' (N times faster than per-channel operation), implying use this for bulk disconnection instead of individual operations. It also provides natural language triggers for when a user might ask for this. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternative scenarios like partial disconnection, but the context is clear.

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