Get tuner debug

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

Annotations already declare that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive diagnostic operation. The description adds useful domain context by listing the counter categories (`tun/dev/ts/flt/net`), but does not explain output shape, tuner validity, or device-auth prerequisites.

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 compact and front-loaded: one endpoint reference plus the diagnostic categories. No filler or redundant restatement.

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 simple one-parameter read-only diagnostic tool, the description conveys the endpoint and general counter categories. It remains incomplete on tuner-number semantics and expected diagnostic output, which matters because there is no output schema.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. The `/tuner<n>/debug` path implies the single required `tuner` parameter is the tuner index, which is useful, but it does not specify valid range, indexing base, or error behavior.

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?

Names the exact endpoint `/tuner<n>/debug` and identifies the resource as extended tuner diagnostic counters. That is specific enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like get_tuner_status or get_sys_debug, though it lacks an explicit verb such as “retrieve.”

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this instead of get_tuner_status, get_tuner_streaminfo, get_tuner_vstatus, or get_sys_debug. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and endpoint path alone.

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