get_power_actionCheck whether a shutdown, restart, or sleep is scheduled on your Mac and see the countdown time remaining until it occurs.
Indica si hay un apagado/reinicio/reposo programado y cuánto falta.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safe read-only nature. The description adds that the tool reports presence and remaining time for three kinds of power actions, which is useful context but does not disclose deeper behavior like exact response structure or units.
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, well-formed sentence with no filler. The main function is front-loaded and every word contributes meaning.
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?
For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys the core return semantics: presence of a scheduled power action and time remaining. It is slightly vague about the exact format or units of the remaining time, but sufficient for selection and 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?
The tool has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description contains no parameter-specific information, which is correct and complete.
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 states a specific verb ('indica') and a clear resource: whether a scheduled shutdown/restart/sleep exists and how long remains. It is unambiguous, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling action tools like shutdown or cancel_power_action.
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 is given for when to use this tool versus alternatives such as shutdown, restart, sleep, or cancel_power_action. The intended use is implied by the read-only phrasing, but no explicit exclusions or alternative routing are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.