get_hardware_sensors

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

No annotations are provided. The description mentions 'live sensors' implying real-time data but does not disclose read-only nature, potential blocking, or any side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but provides minimal behavioral details.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose and parameter options with no wasted words. It could be slightly more structured but is highly efficient.

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 an output schema exists (handling return details), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and parameter. It might benefit from mentioning that categories like 'temps' return multiple readings (e.g., CPU, GPU), but overall it is sufficient.

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 single parameter 'category' has a default and the description enumerates valid values ('temps'/'fans'/'battery'/'all'), adding significant meaning beyond the bare schema. Even with 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well.

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 it provides live sensor data for temps, fans, and battery, with an explicit parameter 'category' listing valid values. It distinguishes from similar tools like 'get_battery_health' or 'get_cpu_info' by focusing on sensor monitoring.

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?

Usage is implied (for retrieving sensor readings) but no explicit guidance on when to choose this over siblings like 'get_battery_health' or 'get_cpu_info', nor any exclusion criteria.

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