get_power_analytics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only' which is a key safety trait, and it discloses error behavior: 'Missing sysfs data lands in the errors field.' This adds valuable behavioral context beyond the basic return value list.

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 three sentences, each providing essential information: what is returned, the data source and safety, error handling, and a usage recommendation. No wasted words.

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?

Given that the tool has no params and an output schema exists (which covers return values), the description is complete. It explains what data is retrieved, where from, error behavior, and typical use case. It is fully self-contained.

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 (empty schema), so the baseline is 4. There is nothing to add beyond the schema; the description appropriately focuses on behavior rather than parameter details.

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 power state (AC vs battery), discharge rate in watts, battery percentage, and capacity degradation. This is a specific verb ('returns') with a clear resource (power analytics), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools which cover different system resources.

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 description provides a clear use case: 'Use for laptop power monitoring.' It also specifies the data source (/sys/class/power_supply), giving context on when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but since no sibling tool handles power data, this is sufficient.

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