start_zones

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the zones water 'one after another in the order given,' which is a key behavioral trait, but it does not mention potential side effects, error handling, or what happens upon completion. The disclosure is helpful but incomplete.

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 with no extraneous information. It front-loads the purpose and includes the essential parameter details. Every word earns its place.

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 tool's moderate complexity (multi-zone sequencing), the lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not mention when to use this over siblings, what happens after the sequence, or any error/edge-case behavior. An agent cannot fully determine the appropriate context without additional information.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the structure of the zones array ('zone' and 'minutes'), which is critical because the schema only defines items as objects with additionalProperties. However, the optional 'device' parameter is not described at all, leaving its meaning and usage unclear.

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 states a specific verb ('Run') and resource ('multiple zones') and clarifies the behavior ('in sequence'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like start_zone (singular) and run_schedule (predefined schedule). The purpose is immediately clear.

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 multiple zones in a specific order but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as start_zone or run_schedule. No exclusions or comparative guidance are given, so an agent must infer the intended use.

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