get_cbat_alert_percent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses the return type (UINT8), range (0–100), and default value (10), which are useful for agent understanding. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or has no side effects, though that may be inferred.

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 that efficiently conveys the purpose, type, range, and default. It is front-loaded with the tool name and immediately provides the essential detail. There is no wasted text.

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 simple parameter getter with no parameters, the description adequately covers the needed information: what it returns (the alert threshold), the data type, the allowed range, and the default. No output schema is present, but the return value description suffices.

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, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information. It correctly omits param details, earning a baseline score 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?

The description clearly states what the tool retrieves: 'Remaining capacity percentage to trigger a battery alert.' It adds context beyond the tool name 'cbat_alert_percent' by explaining the meaning of the value. However, it does not differentiate itself from other sibling 'get_' tools that also retrieve battery-related parameters.

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. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or comparison to sibling tools like get_battery or get_use_cbat_alerts.

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