get_inverter_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it discloses the key behavioral nuance: instance=0 aggregates all discovered vebus units under 'readings', while instance=N returns a single device dict. The verb 'Get' also signals a read-only operation.

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?

Two short sentences, with the purpose front-loaded and the only parameter explained immediately after. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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?

For a one-parameter, read-only getter with an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It does not mention a possible dependency on the MQTT tools listed as siblings, but that remains an inference rather than a clear requirement.

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 input schema only states that instance is an integer defaulting to 0. The description adds the essential semantics: 0 is a sentinel for all units, and a non-zero value selects a single device, which is entirely absent from the schema.

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 the action and object directly ('Get inverter mode and state'), then clarifies the data scope with the instance rule. This makes it clearly distinct from write siblings like set_inverter_mode and from getters for other resources.

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 when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives are provided. The agent must infer from the tool name that it is the read counterpart to set_inverter_mode, and there is no mention of list_devices for enumeration or any MQTT prerequisites.

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