home

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that 'suspend' suspends the running game (like the PS button) and that system screens need circle instead, but says nothing about the safety profile, side effects on running apps in the 'system'/'shellcore' modes, or what snapshot_after_ms does.

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?

Front-loads the purpose in the first sentence and adds only the exception and method semantics. The mid-sentence line break before 'method:' is slightly awkward formatting, but the content is dense and waste-free.

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 2-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition is only partially complete: it omits snapshot_after_ms entirely and gives no side-effect or safety context. The method semantics and system-screen exception are present, so it is adequate but not fully self-sufficient.

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 0% and 'method' has no enum, so the description is the only source for its values ('suspend', 'system', 'shellcore') and their semantics — real added value. However, snapshot_after_ms is never mentioned anywhere, leaving half the parameters undocumented.

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?

States a specific action and resource — navigate to the PS5 home screen — and explains the reason it exists ('stands in for the PS button, which the pad cannot send'). That rationale implicitly separates it from press/launch/close_app, though no sibling is named directly.

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?

Gives explicit when-not guidance: 'From system screens such as Settings, press circle instead.' It also explains what the method values mean. There is no broader statement of when to prefer home over close_app or launch, but the key exception is covered.

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