Energy Report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the return format ('kWh consumed per device') and a period constraint, which is useful beyond the annotations. It doesn't disclose other behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, default date handling) but the annotations reduce the burden.

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 sentences, no filler. The first sentence states the action and result, the second provides a concrete usage example. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundancy.

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 only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, return content, and use cases. It could mention response structure or edge cases, but for a simple report tool, the combination of schema, annotations, and description is adequately complete.

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 the schema already documents both parameters (date with default, period with enum). The description reinforces the concept of a 'specific period' but doesn't add syntax or format details beyond the schema, matching the baseline of 3.

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?

Description states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('energy consumption report'), with a specific scope: 'for a specific period' and 'Returns kWh consumed per device.' This distinguishes it from siblings like get_energy_live (likely real-time) and get_insight_entries by focusing on period-based consumption reporting.

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 gives clear usage context via the example query 'how much energy did I use today/this week/this month?', implying periodic historical usage. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like get_energy_live or state when not to use it, so it's clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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