shelly_kvs_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's mention of listing keys is consistent. It adds that etags are returned, which is useful behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose other behaviors like pagination, permissions, or rate limits. Given the safety profile annotated, the description provides adequate but minimal additional transparency.

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 short sentence that immediately conveys the action and key detail (etags, wildcard default). Every part is essential, with no extraneous content. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 only 2 parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose and one parameter. However, it fails to mention the required 'device' parameter, which is a notable omission. For a list tool, the description is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for the 'match' parameter (wildcard pattern, default all), but completely omits the required 'device' parameter, which is critical for invocation. This partial coverage leaves a significant gap, so the description does not sufficiently augment 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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'KVS keys', specifying that etags are included. It also mentions the wildcard pattern default, making the purpose unambiguous. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like shelly_kvs_get which retrieves a single key.

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 implies usage for listing keys with optional filtering via 'match', but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like shelly_kvs_get or shelly_kvs_set. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided, leaving the agent to infer context from tool names.

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