nina_flatdevice_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states that it returns status fields but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what happens if the device is disconnected, or any error conditions. The lack of these details leaves a gap in transparency.

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 of 14 words, succinctly stating the purpose and listing the outputs. No extraneous information is present.

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 lists the return values but does not provide details on the structure or potential errors. Given the lack of an output schema, more context about the return format would improve completeness. However, for a simple info tool, 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?

There are no parameters (0 params), with 100% schema coverage. Per calibration, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics since there are none.

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 clear verb 'Get' and specifies the resource 'flat panel/flat device status'. It lists specific status items (connection, light state, brightness, cover status), which clearly distinguishes it from other info tools (e.g., nina_camera_info) and the sibling nina_flatdevice_set_light.

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 that this tool is used to retrieve flat device status, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention any prerequisites (e.g., device connected). No exclusions or when-not guidance is provided.

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