list_devices

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It transparently explains that a physical device may appear as several entities (behavioral nuance) and lists return fields. Does not address rate limits or side effects, but for a read-only list tool, this is adequate.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, nuance, filter/returns. No redundant information. Every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with core action.

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?

Describes filtering, entity relationship, and return fields (though output schema exists). Missing explanation of the host parameter and any pagination or limits. Overall fairly complete for a list tool.

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 0%, so description must add meaning. It adds value for entity_type by listing example values. However, the host parameter is entirely undocumented in the description, leaving its purpose unclear.

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?

Clearly states the tool lists all configured devices, explains that physical devices may appear as multiple entities, and specifies optional filtering by entity_type with examples. Distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_device (single device) and list_activities.

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?

Implied usage: use when you need to list all devices or filter by entity type. No explicit comparison to alternatives like get_device for retrieving a single device, nor guidance on when not to use this tool.

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