set_light_properties

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds one useful unit convention ('Angles are DEGREES') but fails to disclose whether unspecified settings remain unchanged, what null values do, whether the operation is destructive, or whether certain parameters apply only to specific light types.

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 very short and front-loaded, with no filler. However, the brevity comes at the expense of substance, leaving important behavioral and parameter information unstated.

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?

This is a 12-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, yet the description provides almost no context about parameter relationships, null semantics, or side effects. The single unit clarification is helpful but far from sufficient for an agent to call this tool correctly.

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 description coverage is only 17% and most of the 12 parameters lack meaningful descriptions. The description adds only the degrees clarification, which helps angle and spot_size, but does not compensate for the many undocumented parameters like spot_blend, diffuse_factor, specular_factor, or shadow_soft_size.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Update a light's settings.' It differentiates from siblings like create_light, delete_light, and list_lights, though 'settings' is a bit generic and doesn't enumerate which properties can be changed.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of when not to use it. The 'update' phrasing implies modifying an existing light, but it does not direct the agent to list lights first or explain how this differs from create_light.

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