create_scene

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that the current look is captured, but says nothing about whether an existing scene with the same name is overwritten, what permissions are required, or whether creating a scene affects the live lights. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a real gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and the resulting resource are the first things the reader sees.

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 need not be explained, and the two-parameter surface is small. However, for a write/create tool with no annotations, the description omits conflict/overwrite behavior and permissions, leaving the agent short of what it needs to call it safely.

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 50%: 'room' is documented in the schema, while 'name' has only type/length constraints. The description adds marginal meaning by clarifying that the room/zone's lights are the source and that the result is a new scene, but adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb+resource ('Save ... as a new scene') and clarifies scope ('a room or zone's lights'). It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling activate_scene (which applies an existing scene rather than creating one), but never names or contrasts with that sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like activate_scene, and no stated prerequisites. The agent must infer that this is the creation counterpart to activation from the wording alone.

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