plenticore_energy

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

Annotations already declare this a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive call, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two genuinely useful behavioral notes beyond that: values are 'inverter-native' (unprocessed, not normalized) and units must be preserved. It does not say whether counters are cumulative, their resolution, or how units are labeled.

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?

Two terse sentences with no filler; the scope statement comes first and the units caveat second. Every clause carries information.

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 single-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description plus annotations are close to sufficient; return values need not be explained. The gaps are minor but real: unit conventions and the meaning of the aggregate periods are left implicit.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden, but it mostly restates the enum values already visible in the schema. It does not explain the semantics of 'Total' vs 'Year' or mention the 'Day' default, leaving real ambiguity unaddressed.

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 specific verb and resource ('Read inverter-native energy counters') and binds it to the four period values, which distinguishes it from siblings like plenticore_battery or plenticore_status. It does not explicitly name any sibling, so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 guidance on when to use this versus related siblings (e.g. plenticore_list_process_data or plenticore_overview), and no prerequisites or exclusions. The period list implies context but gives the agent nothing to decide with.

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