Send the ON command to a device by providing its public ID, activating it through the @nexalware/mcp server.
Shorthand for sending the ON command to a device.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| deviceId | Yes | The device's public id, e.g. dev_a1b2c3. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals that this is a write/command operation ('sending the ON command'), but says nothing about idempotency, required permissions, error behavior, or what a device already on does.
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?
One short sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no 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 trivial single-parameter command tool with no output schema this is close to adequate, but the missing relationship to send_command/turn_device_off and any note on idempotency leaves a gap an agent cannot fill from structured data.
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 single deviceId parameter has 100% schema description coverage with a concrete example format, so the schema already does the work. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema.
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?
States a specific action (turning a device on) and the resource (device), and the phrasing implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling turn_device_off. It does not explicitly name the sibling or confirm it is the same as send_command with an ON payload, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus turn_device_off, send_command, or send_sub_device_command. The word 'Shorthand' hints at an equivalence but never states when that shorthand is preferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.