set_timer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a genuinely important behavioral trait: the timer runs on the bridge and fires even after the conversation ends. It stops short of stating that the timer fires once, or how it relates to cancel_timer, which would complete the picture.

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 sentences, front-loaded with a concrete example followed by the persistence caveat. No filler, though the second sentence could be tightened slightly.

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 no explanation, and the description covers the key non-obvious behavior of bridge-side persistence. It leaves gaps on interaction with cancel_timer/list_timers and whether the timer is one-shot, but is largely sufficient for correct invocation.

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 75%: target, action, and target_type are documented in the schema, and minutes carries explicit bounds. The description only echoes 'bedroom' and 'off' through its example, adding no format or syntax detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 conveys the core function through a concrete example ('turn the bedroom off in 30 minutes') — scheduling a device action after a delay. It is clear but never names the operation type or distinguishes itself from timer siblings like list_timers and cancel_timer.

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?

Usage is only implied through the example; there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as cancel_timer or list_timers for managing the created timer. The agent must infer from the example when this tool applies.

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