set_ams_drying

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It mentions 'Sends an ams_control MQTT command', which adds transparency about the underlying mechanism. However, it does not discuss potential delays, success/failure feedback, or side effects, leaving gaps for a critical control action.

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 cover purpose, compatibility, and mechanism with no redundant words. The description is efficiently front-loaded with the core action.

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 simple start/stop command, the description provides adequate purpose and compatibility. However, without an output schema, it lacks detail on what the agent should expect after invocation (e.g., confirmation, status update). This is a modest completeness gap given the tool's low complexity.

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 already describes all five parameters (100% coverage), including the action enum and ams_id range. The description adds no parameter-specific context beyond the implementation note, so it does not significantly augment the schema meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Start or stop the AMS filament drying cycle', using a specific verb for the action and identifying the resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings, as none other mention drying cycles.

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 specifies that the tool is 'Available on AMS units with heating capability (AMS Pro / AMS-HT)', providing clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the compatibility note is sufficient for correct selection.

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