set_device_parameter

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

Describes the expected value range (0.0 to 1.0) and mentions the need for normalized values. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does not disclose side effects or error behavior, which is acceptable for a simple setter.

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 concise with two clear paragraphs. The first states the action, the second lists parameters and a usage note. It is well-structured, though slightly verbose with the note formatting.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the basic operation and parameter details. However, it lacks information about error handling or what happens if indices are out of range.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description fully explains each parameter, including the normalization of 'value'. This compensates completely for the schema gap.

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 'Sets a specific device parameter,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'set_device_parameters' and other set_track_* tools.

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?

Provides guidance on when to check 'get_track' for UI-readable values and emphasizes using normalized values. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives.

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