identify_light

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It accurately describes a non-destructive, temporary pulsing action. It does not mention permissions or state restoration, but for a simple identification tool this is sufficient.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the purpose and action without extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 an output schema (not shown), so return value explanation is unnecessary. The description covers the core function; however, missing details like prerequisites (e.g., light must be on) or error cases slightly reduce completeness.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description should explain parameters. The single parameter 'light_id' is not elaborated on, though its name and context make the meaning clear. A brief note on how to obtain the ID (e.g., from list_lights) would add value.

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 ('breathe') and resource ('light'), clearly stating the outcome ('physically locate it'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'set_light' or 'list_lights' by focusing on physical identification.

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 locating a light physically, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative guidance. While the purpose is clear, adding context like 'Use when you need to find which bulb corresponds to a given light_id' would improve it.

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