Set operation mode

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds value by explaining each mode's meaning, noting that effect mode requires an effectId, and directing users to sibling tools for movie/effect selection. It does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., resetting current settings), but the core behavior is clearly described.

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 two sentences long, packed with essential information. It leads with the primary action, lists modes compactly with parentheticals, and ends with a cross-reference to sibling tools. No redundant or filler content.

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 three parameters (one required) and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, all modes, the effectId prerequisite, and the correct tool for selecting specific movies/effects. Combined with the schema, an agent has sufficient context to invoke the tool correctly without ambiguity.

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 already provides full coverage (100%) with descriptions for all parameters, but the tool description enriches meaning significantly: it explains each enum value in plain terms (e.g., 'demo (built-in loop)', 'movie (a saved movie)') and specifies that effectId is used with effect mode. This goes beyond the schema's simple 'The operation mode to switch to.'

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 'Set the LED operation mode directly' and enumerates all mode values with concise explanations. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by pointing to set_movie/set_effect for movie/effect selection, making the tool's specific responsibility unambiguous.

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 explicitly says 'To pick which movie/effect plays, use set_movie / set_effect,' providing a direct alternative for a common sub-task. It also clarifies that this tool is for direct mode switching, implicitly distinguishing it from parameter-adjustment tools like set_color and set_brightness.

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