home_assistant_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what information is retrieved but does not describe how the tool behaves—e.g., whether it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns data in a specific format, or if it's a read-only operation. This lack of detail makes it difficult for an agent to anticipate the tool's behavior beyond the basic output.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without any redundant information. It is front-loaded with the key action ('Get') and lists the specific data points retrieved, making it easy to parse and understand quickly. Every word contributes to clarifying the tool's purpose.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (simple status retrieval with no parameters) and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It specifies what data is fetched but does not cover behavioral aspects like authentication needs, error handling, or output format, which are crucial for an agent to use the tool effectively in a real-world context.

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 has zero parameters, and the input schema has 100% description coverage (though empty). The description does not need to add parameter semantics, as there are none to document. It appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose without unnecessary parameter details, meeting the baseline for tools with no parameters.

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 tool's function with specific verbs ('Get') and resources ('Home Assistant version, entity count, and available domains'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'home_assistant_get_entity' and 'home_assistant_list_entities' by focusing on system status rather than individual entities or entity listings. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other status tools like 'opnsense_status' or 'proxmox_status', which slightly limits differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context for usage, or comparisons to sibling tools such as 'system_info' or other status-checking tools in the list. This leaves the agent without explicit direction on tool selection in relevant scenarios.

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