bambuddy_get_printer_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations by noting the snapshot is 'sanitized' and that AMS summaries are 'non-secret,' indicating that sensitive data is intentionally filtered out. No contradiction 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?

The description is a single, information-dense sentence. It front-loads the core action and object, then lists the relevant content categories without any filler. Every clause contributes meaning.

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 simple read-only status tool with a rich output schema, the description covers the essential scope and content areas. It does not explain how to obtain printer_id or differentiate itself from diagnostic/current-print tools, but the annotations and output schema reduce the need for additional safety or return-format detail.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description needed to explain the parameter more, but it only indirectly ties printer_id to 'one Bambuddy printer.' The single parameter is fairly self-explanatory from its name and type, yet there is no guidance on where printer_id comes from or how it relates to sibling tools like bambuddy_list_printers.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get a sanitized live status snapshot for one Bambuddy printer.' It enumerates concrete content areas (print progress, temperatures, HMS issues, non-secret AMS summaries), which makes the tool's function unambiguous and distinguishes it from broader listing or diagnostic siblings.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you want a live status snapshot of a single printer, including progress, temperatures, issues, and AMS info. It does not name exclusions or explicitly contrast with siblings like bambuddy_get_current_print or bambuddy_diagnose_printer, but the scope is clear enough for an agent to select it.

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