Set color

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: 'switch the device into color mode so it shows immediately,' which reveals a state change and immediate effect. It does not cover persistence or interaction with current effects, but the disclosed mode switch is a valuable addition beyond 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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no redundant wording. Every clause earns its place, including the mode-switch behavior and the exactly-one constraint.

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 tool with two nested color objects and an optional device parameter, the description covers the main usage constraint (exactly one) and immediate effect. It does not mention return values or errors, but no output schema exists and this is a simple setter. It is mostly complete, with slight room for clarifying interactions with effects.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds crucial semantics: 'Provide exactly one of rgb or hsv' resolves the mutual exclusivity that the schema does not enforce (required is 0). It also clarifies the purpose of each color space with ranges, which reinforces schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Set a single static color and switch the device into color mode.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_effect by emphasizing 'static' color and from set_brightness/set_saturation by targeting the full color.

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 description implies usage for static color changes ('Set a single static color') and provides the critical constraint 'Provide exactly one of rgb or hsv', but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. The sibling list suggests set_effect is for effects, but the description does not say 'use set_effect for dynamic effects'.

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