Zähler und Stände

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is known without the description. The description usefully adds that each meter comes with its latest reading and that meter_id narrows to that meter's recent readings, but says nothing about result limits, ordering, or how many 'letzte Stände' are returned.

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?

A single semicolon-joined sentence that front-loads the primary behavior and then the meter_id variant. Every clause carries information; 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-shape explanation is unnecessary, and annotations cover safety; the description covers both parameter modes for a two-parameter tool. The only gap is the unspecified cardinality/ordering of "die letzten Stände" when meter_id is supplied.

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%, so the parameters are already documented ("nur dieser Zähler", "ID der Immobilie, siehe Werkzeug list_properties"). The description adds a real semantic distinction the schema does not: without meter_id you get one latest reading per meter, with meter_id you get multiple prior readings, but it does not quantify that difference.

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 a concrete resource ("Die Zähler einer Immobilie") and states the returned value ("mit ihrem neuesten Stand"), plus a second mode ("mit meter_id die letzten Stände dieses Zählers"). It is clearly a read/list operation over meters and readings, though it never names a sibling it is distinct from.

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?

It implicitly conveys the two calling modes: pass only property_id to get the property's meters with latest readings, or add meter_id to drill into that meter's recent readings. There is no explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives (e.g., check_meter_reading or record_meter_reading) and no exclusions, so guidance is present but inferred.

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