bosch_camera_audio_detection_set

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses read-modify-write behavior, the fact that both fields are always sent on PUT (Bosch API resets omitted fields), and the return value. This is highly transparent for a mutation tool.

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?

Six sentences, each providing essential information. Front-loaded with main action. No wasted words. Important details are included without being verbose.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, read-modify-write, API quirk, Gen2 requirement), the description covers all necessary context. Output schema exists, but description still succinctly notes return value. No gaps.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains that glass_break and fire_alarm are boolean, at least one required, and how they merge with current config. Does not explain camera parameter, but that is self-explanatory as device identifier.

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?

Clearly states it updates glass-break and fire-alarm detection for Gen2 cameras. The verb 'update' and specific resource 'audio detection' are explicit. It distinguishes from siblings like bosch_camera_audio_detection_get (read) and bosch_camera_audio_set (general audio settings).

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 states it is a Gen2 Audio-Plus-only feature and raises hardware_unsupported for Gen1. Specifies that at least one of glass_break or fire_alarm must be provided. However, it does not explicitly compare with sibling tools like bosch_camera_audio_detection_get, though the usage is clear from context.

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