devices_list_devices

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

With no annotations provided, the description adds some behavioral context by specifying the internal endpoint and listing return fields. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only, non-destructive operation, nor address potential performance implications of listing all devices.

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?

Extremely concise with two clear sentences: one stating the main action and source, the other enumerating fields. No wasted words.

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?

Given no parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the essential purpose. It lacks discussion of pagination or result size, but for a simple listing tool, it is largely adequate.

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?

The tool has no parameters, so the description cannot add value over the input schema. Per guidelines, baseline is 4 for zero parameters.

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?

Tool name and description clearly state it lists all devices via a specific WS endpoint. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like devices_list_devices_in_area or areas_list_devices, the 'all' qualifier distinguishes it as a broader listing.

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 tool vs alternatives (e.g., search_search_devices for filtered results or devices_list_devices_in_area for area-specific lists). The description lacks any context on appropriate usage scenarios.

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