set_return_device_parameter

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

The description adds no behavioral insights beyond the annotation destructiveHint:false. It does not mention side effects, permission requirements, or the impact of setting a parameter.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It directly states the core functionality.

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 4 required parameters with no schema descriptions, the description is too brief to provide adequate context. It does not reference the output schema or connect with sibling tools.

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 only adds that 'parameter' can be a name or index, but fails to explain return_index, device_index, or value. This is minimal compensation.

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 identifies the action ('Set'), the target ('parameter on a Return-track device'), and the method ('by name or index'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like set_device_parameter (tracks) and set_master_device_parameter (master).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no context for selection among the many sibling tools that set parameters on different device types.

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