monitor_on

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only, not idempotent, not destructive, and can have external effects. The description adds the 'back on' state change but does not disclose additional behavioral nuance (e.g., what happens if the monitor is already on or if user permission is needed). It does not contradict the annotations.

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 deliver the core action and clear trigger phrases with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the key verb phrase is front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is complete: it defines the action, gives user paraphrase examples, and implies the opposite of monitor_off. No additional context is necessary 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?

With zero parameters, there is no parameter semantics to document. Baseline 4 applies because the description need not compensate for missing schema details; no arguments are needed.

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 and resource: 'Turn the monitor/screen back on.' It clearly differentiates this from the sibling monitor_off and get_monitor_state functions by identifying the action direction (turning on).

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?

Explicitly provides trigger phrasing ('turn on the screen', 'wake the display', 'or similar'), giving clear context for when to invoke. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but for a simple command the guidance is sufficient.

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