momentary_on_off_multi

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the core behavior (auto-off after a time) and the bitwise selection mechanism, but it does not mention side effects, idempotency, or interaction with other groups. The schema covers some parameter-specific semantics, but the description alone is somewhat minimal.

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, concise sentence that effectively communicates the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the key action and adds necessary detail about the auto-off behavior. No extraneous information.

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 has 4 parameters, all well-documented in the schema, so the description doesn't need to repeat them. The description provides the essential high-level behavior, and given the absence of an output schema, it adequately explains what the tool does. It could be slightly more detailed about return values or error conditions, but overall it is sufficient for a domain-aware agent.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, though the '按位' reference aligns with the mask parameter. No additional value is provided for time or group semantics.

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's function: it performs a multi-channel momentary ON→OFF operation, turning on specified relays and automatically turning them off after a specified time. The phrase '按位' and '多路' distinguish it from single-channel and blink siblings.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is suitable for multi-relay operations or that single-channel variants exist. Users must infer usage from the tool name and schema.

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