get_dispensers_by_asset

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds '(default: open)', which clarifies the default status behavior, but does not disclose other aspects like pagination or response format. 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, front-loaded sentence that states the core function and the most important default. It is concise and free of unnecessary words.

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 tool is relatively simple, with rich schema annotations and full parameter descriptions. The description covers the primary use case and default status. While there is no output schema, the return type ('dispensers') is inferable, and the annotations cover safety. Slightly more context about response behavior could be added, but it is adequate.

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 all parameters are documented. The description adds the default status ('open') which is also in the schema, providing no additional meaningful meaning beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('dispensers') with a clear scope ('for a specific asset'). The tool name 'get_dispensers_by_asset' reinforces this, and the description distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_dispensers' and 'get_address_dispensers'.

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 implies usage for retrieving dispensers tied to a specific asset, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_dispensers' for all or 'get_address_dispensers' for an address). No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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