get_sensors

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so safety and mutability are covered. The description adds content scope (sensor types with thresholds and health) but does not disclose return format, pagination, or side effects beyond what annotations provide.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words, and it front-loads the sensor categories. It is appropriately sized, though the lack of a verb makes it slightly less structured than ideal.

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 simple read-only tool with annotations covering safety and a schema fully describing parameters, the description is adequate but incomplete. It omits when to use the tool, how results relate to siblings like get_health, and any output format details.

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 100%, and all three parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter information, so the baseline of 3 applies when the schema carries full parameter semantics.

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 names the specific resource categories returned (temperatures, fans, voltages, power supplies, power draw) and mentions thresholds and health, making the data scope clear. However, it lacks an explicit verb and does not differentiate itself from sibling tools like get_health or get_power_state, which may overlap.

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 such as get_health or get_power_state. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or the required target parameter context.

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