Get all devices

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful scoping detail that results are limited to the authenticated user's own devices rather than an admin-wide listing, but says nothing about result shape, ordering, or pagination.

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 short sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though efficiency here is partly achieved by omitting information rather than by tight editing.

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 no output schema and three undocumented parameters, the description should carry the burden of explaining the call shape and what comes back. Instead it is four words, leaving the agent without enough to invoke the tool correctly beyond the bare endpoint meaning.

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?

All three parameters (form, params, json_body) have 0% schema description coverage, and the description says nothing about them. These appear to be generic HTTP wrapper fields, which is exactly the case where the description should explain how to supply them, yet it is silent.

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 verb (List) and resource (devices) with a scope qualifier (current user), which is better than a restated title. However, it does not distinguish this from close siblings like vaultwarden_get_device or vaultwarden_get_known_device, so an agent cannot confidently pick among them from the text alone.

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 exclusion of alternatives, and no mention of prerequisites such as authentication. The only hint is the phrase 'current user', leaving the agent to infer the choice against get_device by name alone.

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