Homey home overview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful context: it returns counts and names rather than full records, and clarifies that it's an overview for orientation. This is consistent with annotations and adds value beyond them, though it doesn't mention any edge cases like pagination or rate limits (which may be unnecessary given readOnly).

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 a single, information-dense paragraph that front-loads the core purpose ('Orients you in this Homey in one call') and then enumerates contents. It could be slightly more concise, but it avoids fluff and every clause adds value. It ends with actionable guidance (use include, use other tools for details).

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 what the tool returns (counts and names), when to use it (before other tools), and what it does NOT return (full device records), directing to homey_devices_search and homey_device_get. It also mentions the `include` narrowing option. With no output schema, it clearly sets expectations for the response. The only minor gap is that it doesn't list specific section names beyond examples, but the include enum covers that.

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 coverage is 100%: both 'limit' and 'include' have descriptions in the schema. The description adds a usage hint for `include` ('Narrow it with include when you only need one part'), which is helpful but not substantial beyond the schema's own definitions. Baseline 3 fits as the schema already documents parameters well.

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 purpose: 'Orients you in this Homey in one call' and lists specific resources it covers (zone tree, device counts, apps, variables, presence, flows, capabilities, etc.). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly directing to 'homey_devices_search or homey_device_get' for actual device records, making it clearly a high-level overview tool.

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?

It explicitly says to call this before any other Homey tool, provides the rationale (orientation), and mentions using other tools for detailed device state. It also explains how to narrow scope with the 'include' parameter. This is exemplary usage guidance with clear alternatives and context.

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