Set X-Fan (blow)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the post-shutdown fan behavior and the config prerequisite, which are meaningful behavioral traits. It does not cover every edge case (e.g., error behavior when config is disabled), but the core effect and condition are transparent.

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?

Two short sentences with no wordiness. The action and feature explanation are front-loaded, and the config prerequisite follows naturally. Every sentence contributes useful 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?

For a simple boolean toggle with no output schema, the description explains the purpose, the effect, and the one critical precondition. Device selection is covered by the schema descriptions of mac and name. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly, though it omits potential failure behavior when the config prerequisite is unmet.

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 67%: the mac and name parameters are described in the schema, but the required 'on' parameter has no schema description. The tool description's 'Enable/disable' implicitly maps to the 'on' boolean but does not explicitly say 'true enables, false disables' or discuss any side effects. This adds some meaning over the schema but leaves the most important parameter underspecified.

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 uses a specific verb ('Enable/disable') and a specific resource ('X-Fan'), and immediately defines what X-Fan does ('keeps the fan running after shutdown to dry the coil'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling fan controls like set_fan_speed or set_turbo_mode.

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 states a concrete precondition: 'Only usable if xFan is enabled in config.' This tells the agent when the tool is applicable and when it should not be attempted. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the unique X-Fan feature and the precondition provide clear usage context.

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