IvedaAI: Camera State

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds context beyond that by explaining the response JSON: 'status' is the HTTP status code, and 'truncated'/'timedOut' flag cut-off responses. This gives useful behavioral insights without contradicting 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 well-structured: a brief intro about response format, then the endpoint and a compact list of query parameters. It avoids unnecessary verbosity while including all necessary details, though it is dense.

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?

The description covers the endpoint, parameters, and response metadata (status, truncation flags), but it does not describe the actual shape of the returned camera state history data. Since there is no output schema, this is a notable gap, though acceptable for a read-only list operation.

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 input schema is generic (with a free-form query object), but the description enumerates all specific query parameters (offset, page, pageSize, start, end, cameraId, etc.) with types, required markers, and time format. This is essential for correct invocation and goes far beyond the schema's generic description.

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 'Find camera state history' via the GET /api/camerastatehistorys endpoint. The verb 'Find' and resource 'camera state history' are specific, distinguishing it from sibling IvedaAI tools for other resources.

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 usage is implied by the resource name and endpoint—if you need camera state history, this is the tool. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it, which prevents a higher score.

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