get_idn

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Query' and '*IDN?' imply a read-only, side-effect-free operation, but the description does not explicitly state safety, connection requirements, or side effects. The returned fields are covered by the output schema.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then lists the fields. No words are wasted and the structure is appropriate for a simple query tool.

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 zero-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it names the command and returned fields. It omits context about when to use it versus other identity/system-info tools and whether a connection is prerequisite.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document. Per the rubric, zero parameters establish a baseline of 4.

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?

States a specific verb ('Query'), resource ('instrument identity'), the SCPI command (*IDN?), and the returned fields (manufacturer, model, serial, firmware). It is clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_system_info or get_system_config.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., connection required), and no alternatives to consider. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and description alone.

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