update_light

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'Update settings' and describes settings as key-value pairs, but does not disclose whether the update is partial or full replacement, what side effects occur, whether permissions are required, or what the response contains.

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 compact and well-organized: a one-sentence purpose followed by three concise parameter bullets. Every sentence earns its place, and no redundant information is present.

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?

The description covers all required parameters and their sources, and an output schema exists so return values need not be described. However, because the tool performs a mutation and there are no annotations, some behavioral context—such as whether settings are merged or replaced—would improve completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by detailing each parameter: host formats (name, ID, or MAC:numericId composite), settings as key-value pairs, and the provenance of light_id from list_lights. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema types.

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: 'Update settings for a Protect light' with concrete examples like brightness and sensitivity. This distinguishes it from sibling update_* tools targeting other resources (e.g., update_camera, update_chime) by naming the specific device type.

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 provides clear context on how to invoke the tool, including that light_id is REQUIRED and should be obtained from list_lights. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the resource-specific purpose and prerequisite guidance make the intended usage clear.

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