Get channelmap

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the endpoint path — no note on whether the map is device-wide or per-tuner scoped, no return format, no failure behavior for an invalid tuner.

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?

It is a single short fragment with no filler, which is appropriately front-loaded. But the brevity crosses into under-specification: an endpoint path plus a noun phrase is not a structured description of behavior.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should convey what the channel map looks like (entries, channel numbers, frequencies, modulation). It does not, and with the only parameter undocumented, an agent cannot confidently call this beyond guessing the tuner index.

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 single parameter `tuner` has 0% schema description coverage, and the description only surfaces it indirectly via the `/tuner<n>/` path fragment. It does not state whether the index is 0- or 1-based, its valid range, or what happens with an out-of-range value — the description must compensate here and does not.

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 identifies the resource — the configured channel-to-frequency map — and ties it to the `/tuner<n>/channelmap` endpoint, so an agent can infer it is a read of that endpoint. However, it never states a verb explicitly and offers no differentiation from siblings like hdhomerun_get_channel or hdhomerun_set_channelmap; the agent must know the HDHomeRun API to disambiguate.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer hdhomerun_get_channel or hdhomerun_set_channelmap, and no stated prerequisites (e.g., device reachability or valid tuner index). The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the name and endpoint path.

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