adjust_local_spot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions 'without removing and re-adding it' hinting at non-destructive behavior, but lacks details on side effects, permission needs, immediate application, or save_as behavior. Moderate 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?

The description is concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. It lists changeable aspects and then parameters. The parameter list is somewhat redundant with schema but helpful given no schema descriptions. No wasted sentences.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered externally. The description specifies required and optional inputs adequately for a modification tool. It does not mention error cases or invalid spot_index, but given the complexity (7 params), it is reasonably complete.

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 0%, so the description compensates by listing all parameter names and their general purpose in a sentence. It adds meaning beyond the schema, but does not explain structures of parameters or luminance_range objects fully.

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 it modifies an existing Locallab spot in a PP3 profile, listing specific changeable aspects (processing parameters, luminance range, strength, enable/disable). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_device_preset_tool or remove_local_adjustment.

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 implies usage for modifying an existing spot without removing/re-adding, but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives or provide any when-not-to guidance. Sibling tools are not compared.

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