apple_tv_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds real behavioral context beyond them by stating that media_app does not guarantee foreground/visible application and that status does not capture the screen. It does not describe refresh timing or determinism of the snapshot, which would be the next useful detail.

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?

Front-loads what is read in the first clause, then spends the remaining two sentences on the two cases most likely to cause misuse (media_app semantics, screen capture). No filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not required, and the description covers purpose, one clear alternative, and the key field caveat. It stops short of stating the freshness/cost of the read or how it relates to the other state-mutating siblings, which is a minor gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description still adds meaning about a returned field (media_app), which is more than the empty input schema conveys.

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?

States a specific verb (Read) and resource (current device/power/playback/volume/keyboard state), and enumerates the state domains covered so an agent can distinguish it from apple_tv_power, apple_tv_playback, or apple_tv_set_volume. It explicitly names apple_tv_screenshot as the sibling for a different need.

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use-else clause: for rendered screen content, use apple_tv_screenshot instead. It also clarifies that media_app is not a foreground-app indicator, steering the agent away from a wrong inference. It does not cover the other read-ish siblings (capabilities, list_apps), but the main boundary is drawn.

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