List Insight Logs

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

Annotations already confirm read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds behavioral detail about the return tuple (log ID, title, data type, units) and implies that all available logs are returned. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose and return fields, second gives usage guidance. No wasted words; information is front-loaded and well-structured.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers the tool's behavior: what it lists, what it returns, and how to use the result. The presence of annotations further strengthens completeness.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter meaning, but it provides useful information about the output fields. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 explicitly states 'List all available insight logs' with specific examples (sensor history, energy meters), and enumerates returned fields (log ID, title, data type, units). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tool get_insight_entries.

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?

Explicitly states that the log ID from this tool should be used with get_insight_entries to retrieve historical data, providing clear context for when to use this tool. No exclusions or alternative use cases are given, but the guidance is sufficient for a simple listing tool.

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