Monitor Battery

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verb '查看' implies a read-only operation, and the scenario qualifier usefully signals that a battery may not exist on all hosts, but nothing is said about permissions, failure behavior on battery-less systems, or invocation constraints.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; the purpose leads and the scenario qualifier follows. It is tightly sized, though it leaves little room for the context an agent might want.

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 full schema coverage and an output schema present, the return contract and parameters are covered elsewhere. The remaining gap is behavioral and usage context, which the description only partially addresses through the laptop/UPS qualifier.

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%, so host, port, scheme, and profile are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clear verb+resource (查看电池状态 / view battery status) that distinguishes it from hardware-oriented siblings like monitor_cpu, monitor_disk, monitor_gpu, and monitor_fan. It is self-evidently a battery-specific monitor, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with any named sibling.

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 parenthetical '（笔记本/UPS 场景）' scopes the tool to laptop/UPS scenarios, which is a usage hint, but it names no alternatives and gives no when-not-to-use guidance (e.g., that typical NAS hosts have no battery). Usage is implied rather than stated.

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