Get printer audit

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

The description only states the function of the tool without disclosing behavioral traits. Since no annotations are provided, the description should cover aspects like read-only nature, authentication requirements, or potential side effects, but it does not.

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, clear sentence with no superfluous information. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the basic function. However, it lacks details about the return structure or what the audit data contains, which would be helpful for an agent invoking it.

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 covers the single parameter 'deviceUid' with a description 'Printer device UID'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or usage hints beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline for 100% coverage is 3.

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 the action 'Get' and the resource 'audit data of a printer device'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'datto_get_audit_by_mac' and other get tools by specifying the resource type. However, it could be more specific about what audit data includes.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'datto_get_audit_by_mac' or 'datto_get_device_audit'. There are no indications of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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