gtv_set_device

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic selection action, such as whether it overwrites a previous device, requires prior pairing, or echoes any confirmation. Minimal transparency.

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?

Single sentence, no superfluous words. Clearly front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place.

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 context-setting tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It could mention that the device must be paired and that subsequent commands will use this selection, but overall it suffices for basic usage.

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 is 100% for the single parameter, so baseline is 3. Description adds an example ('e.g. 192.168.1.42') but largely restates the schema description ('Device host (IP) or name'). No significant additional meaning.

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?

Clearly states the action (select), resource (paired device), and method (by host or name). Distinguishes from sibling tools like gtv_list_devices (listing) and gtv_send_key (sending keys) by specifying that it sets a target for subsequent commands.

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?

Implies when to use (before other commands that need a target), but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. For example, if a command already accepts a device parameter, this tool might be unnecessary, but no such context is provided.

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