connect_relay

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that the relay is set to ON, but does not explain whether the state is latched, requires a connection, or has any side effects. This is insufficient for a control tool.

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 a single sentence with a parameter list, front-loaded with the action. Every word earns its place, with 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?

The tool is simple, but without annotations or an output schema, the description needs to provide more context. It omits prerequisites (like connection setup), the nature of the relay action (momentary vs. latching), and any indication of how this compares to alternative tools, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 schema provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for both parameters (address and channel). The description merely repeats the parameter names without adding new semantic meaning, so it adds no value beyond the schema.

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 action: energize/activate a specified single relay channel on a specified device, with the explicit '(ON)' marker. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like all_relays_on or set_relays_by_mask, which operate on multiple relays.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It simply states the action without contextualizing it against related tools such as disconnect_relay or all_relays_on.

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