roboshadow_get_updates_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal the return scope ('organisation-wide', 'top devices requiring attention') and implies a read-only operation through 'Get'. It does not mention authorization, rate limits, or output limitations beyond 'top', but the disclosed scope and content are reasonable for a simple read tool.

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 sentence with the essential action and resource front-loaded. The parenthetical adds valuable specific detail, and the trailing clause about top devices earns its place. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description conveys the key facts: it returns summary counts for several update categories and a list of top devices. It could be slightly more explicit about the exact shape of the return value, but it is sufficient for an agent to understand what to expect.

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%, with both 'organisationId' and 'days' already documented in the input schema. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('organisation-wide update summary statistics'), then enumerates the exact statistic types (critical/security/driver/rollup updates, reboot-pending count, top devices). This clearly distinguishes it from per-device siblings like roboshadow_get_updates_report_by_device or roboshadow_get_device_updates.

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 phrase 'organisation-wide' implies this is for a high-level overview rather than per-device detail, but the description gives no explicit 'when to use vs alternatives' statement or pointer to sibling tools. It is clear context but without exclusions or alternative routing, so it earns the 'implied usage' middle score.

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