Retrieve detailed information, SDO object dictionary, and PDO mappings for a specific EtherCAT slave device by its bus index to configure or diagnose it.
Get detailed information, SDO object dictionary, and PDO mappings for a specific slave device.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slaveIndex | Yes | Slave index on the bus (0-based) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation and the description lists the kinds of data returned, but it does not explicitly confirm no side effects, permissions required, or response format.
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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every element—detailed information, SDO object dictionary, PDO mappings, specific slave—earns its place.
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 tool with no output schema, the description does list the returned content categories. However, without annotations or an output schema, it does not describe the return structure or whether all categories are always present.
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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains that slaveIndex is a 0-based bus index. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides.
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 (Get) and resource (slave info, SDO object dictionary, PDO mappings) for a specific slave device. It implicitly distinguishes itself from read_sdo/read_pdo by describing dictionary and mapping retrieval, but it does not explicitly name or contrast those siblings.
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?
The phrase 'for a specific slave device' implies when the tool is relevant, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus read_sdo, read_pdo, scan_slaves, or get_diagnostics. Usage is inferred rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.