Retrieves process data for explicit module IDs (max 200) from KOSTAL PLENTICORE inverters, returning native values and units for monitoring or integration.
Read explicit {moduleid: [IDs]} (max 200), returning native values and units.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| selection | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior. The description adds useful context: a 200-selection cap and that values are returned in native units, but it does not discuss auth, rate limits, or error behavior.
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 filler. The verb, selection shape, cap, and return semantics are all packed compactly into one statement.
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?
An output schema exists, so return details need not be expanded. However, for a tool whose only parameter is a nested ID map, the description omits how an agent should obtain valid module IDs, likely via plenticore_list_process_data or plenticore_list_modules.
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 must explain the sole nested 'selection' parameter. It does clarify the expected {moduleid: [IDs]} shape and the 200-item max, but it does not explain where valid module IDs come from or any ID format constraints.
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 process data for explicit module-ID selections, with a max of 200 and native values/units returned. It distinguishes itself from a generic list by specifying an explicit selection map, though it does not name the sibling list_process_data directly.
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 word 'explicit' implies this is for known module IDs rather than discovery, but the description never states when to use it versus plenticore_list_process_data or other siblings. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.