Get entity states in area

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: it discloses the internal two-step mechanism (calls areas_get_area_entities, then filters ha.get_states()) and the exact return shape. It does not mention pagination or performance cost of pulling the full state list, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then mechanics, then when/when-not, then returns. Every line is useful, though the internal implementation detail is slightly more than strictly needed for selection.

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 annotations carrying the safety profile, a 100%-covered single-param schema, and an output schema, the description only needs to route the agent and it does so fully. No gaps remain for correct invocation.

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 100% and the single parameter already documents that area_id comes from areas_list_areas, so the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does all the work.

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 ('Get') and resource ('current states of every entity in a given area'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from areas_get_area_entities (registry rows) and snapshot_get_area_snapshot (combined view). An agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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?

Explicit 'Use when' (live state values scoped to one area, e.g. before deciding what to control) and 'Not for' clauses that name the two alternatives with the condition that selects each. Nothing is left to inference.

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