shelly_kvs_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that key etags are returned and that match defaults to all, which is useful, but it says nothing about pagination, result limits, or the required device binding.

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 zero filler; the core action is front-loaded and the parameter note follows. Nothing is redundant.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required. However, for a two-parameter tool with a required device argument, the definition omits any explanation of that required parameter and of result scoping, leaving a real gap.

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 carries the burden. It fully clarifies the non-obvious 'match' parameter (wildcard pattern, default '*'), but the required 'device' parameter is never mentioned, leaving its expected format (ID vs name vs host) unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List KVS keys') and adds that etags are included, which distinguishes it from the sibling shelly_kvs_get. It never explicitly names the alternative, but the read/list shape is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this versus shelly_kvs_get or shelly_kvs_set; the agent must infer that 'list' means enumerate keys rather than fetch one value. No prerequisites or scope constraints are stated.

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