bosch_camera_soft_reset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it discloses that the camera briefly drops offline and—critically—warns that a 404 may really mean 'not supported for this camera/account' rather than a client error. It does not mention permissions or response behavior, but for a simple reset operation this is strong transparency.

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 frontloaded with the action and its main effect, then gives the API specifics, then the exception caveat. The 404 note is detailed but earns its place by preventing the agent from misdiagnosing a valid failure mode. No repeating or filler.

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 one-parameter action with no annotations and an output schema present, the description includes enough: the HTTP method, path, empty body, side effect, and an operational ambiguity in the failure response. The main gap is that the 'camera' parameter itself is not described, so an agent may still need to infer that it is the camera ID used in previous Bosch tools.

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?

The schema only declares a required 'camera' string with zero description. The API path '/v11/video_inputs/{id}/soft_reset' hints that the camera parameter is the Bosch video input ID, but the description never explicitly maps the parameter to that ID. This partially compensates for the missing schema documentation but does not fully clarify format or where the value comes from.

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: 'Reboot one camera (soft reset).' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling bosch_camera_hard_reset by making the soft reset nature explicit. The API path and the behavior 'camera briefly drops offline' leave no doubt about what the tool does.

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 use case is implied: rebooting a single camera via soft reset. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over alternatives such as hard reset, and no exclusions or conditions are given. The offline-warning is useful, but not a selection guide.

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