discover

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results carry units and that this is a prerequisite step, but says nothing about ordering, size, or failure modes when no CTs are configured.

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 sentences, zero filler, and the what-it-returns statement is front-loaded ahead of the call-ordering advice. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does name the returned content (inputs, outputs, units). It could note the likely key/name field an agent needs to feed into 'query', but for a simple discovery call it is sufficient.

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 there is no argument semantics to explain and no schema text needed. Baseline for a parameterless tool is 4.

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?

'List' plus a precise resource ('IoTaWatt inputs (physical CTs/VTs) and calculated outputs with their units') tells the agent exactly what comes back. It implicitly separates itself from 'query' by being the channel-enumeration step, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

'Always call this first ... before querying' gives clear sequencing and the condition that selects this tool over the query/energy tools. It stops short of stating exclusions versus get_config, which could plausibly overlap in exposing configuration.

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