get_cpu_temperature

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses read-only behavior and the graceful fallback where a message is returned in the errors field instead of failing. It does not cover output details, but an output schema exists and the fallback behavior is a key non-obvious trait.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then read-only status, fallback behavior, and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value with no filler or redundancy.

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 parameterless, read-only sensor tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage scenario, alternative tool, and error handling. No additional context is needed for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 applies because there are no parameter semantics to explain, and the description correctly avoids fabricating param-related detail.

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 clearly states the tool returns current CPU temperature from hwmon sensors, which is a specific verb (returns) plus resource (CPU temperature). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_system_health_check by noting it provides raw temperature data rather than an overall verdict.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use for thermal monitoring; prefer get_system_health_check for an overall verdict.' This tells the agent when to choose this tool and explicitly names an alternative for a different scenario.

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