get_bat_capacity

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

No annotations are provided, but the description discloses that the tool is a getter with no parameters, returns a UINT16 value, and includes the range and default. This is sufficient for a simple read operation, though it could mention any side effects (likely none).

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 extremely concise with two sentences and a technical notation. It front-loads the purpose, explains usage, and provides technical specifications without any redundant or filler content.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, its unit, range, default, and practical use case. Nothing essential is missing.

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 no parameters, and the schema covers 100% of properties (none). The description adds no parameter details, which is appropriate since there are none. For zero-parameter tools, the baseline is 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?

The description clearly states that the tool gets battery capacity in mAh, specifying the unit and scope. While the tool name itself is self-explanatory, the description adds detail, but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_battery or get_battery_state.

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 mentions 'Used with current meter to estimate remaining charge,' which implies a scenario for use. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives among the many sibling getters.

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