set_night_light

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

Annotations already establish that this is a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false), so the description appropriately adds the specific behavioral detail: toggling night-light state and setting color temperature. It does not disclose persistency, valid temperature ranges, or interaction between 'enabled' and 'temperature,' but the simple operation is adequately surfaced.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to the operation, and it is easily parseable.

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 two-parameter setter, the description covers the core operation but lacks details an agent may need for correct invocation, such as temperature units/range and whether temperature applies when night light is disabled. No output schema exists, so return behavior is also unspecified.

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 description coverage, the description must compensate for the bare schema. It does connect 'enabled' to enabling/disabling and 'temperature' to color temperature, which adds meaning beyond the raw type names. However, it omits units, range, and what happens when 'enabled' is false, leaving meaningful gaps.

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 relationship: 'Enable or disable night light' and 'set colour temperature.' This clearly differentiates it from display-brightness or monitor-state siblings, even without naming them.

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 usage context is implied: an agent should call this when the user wants night light enabled, disabled, or its color temperature changed. However, it does not explicitly contrast with nearby alternatives like set_display_brightness or monitor_on/off, leaving some routing ambiguity.

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