flipper_ir_send

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'Transmit an infrared signal,' which implies an action but does not explain side effects, whether the Flipper must be connected, potential blocking behavior, or any other operational details. This is a significant gap.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and every part adds value. It efficiently packs key parameter semantics without unnecessary words.

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 tool is simple with three parameters and an output schema is present, so return values need not be explained. However, the description lacks usage context and behavioral transparency, making it only minimally complete for an AI agent to invoke confidently.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so effectively by giving concrete protocol examples (NEC, NECext, Samsung32, RC5, RC6, SIRC) and explicitly stating that address and command are hex values with examples (0x04, 0x08). This adds 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 action (transmit) and the resource (infrared signal), and it specifically names the protocol and parameter format. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool flipper_ir_universal, which may also transmit IR, so it loses a point for lack of distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like flipper_ir_universal. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions. The description only gives parameter examples, not usage context.

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