zwave_node_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It describes the return content (parameter details like default, range, unit) and error behavior (ValueError for unknown node ID). Example parameter types (LED behavior, motion sensitivity) further clarify expected 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 well-structured with a brief first sentence stating purpose, followed by detail on return values and usage guidance. It is not overly verbose, though the param example could be more integrated.

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 existence of an output schema (providing return structure) and a single simple parameter, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, return values, related tool, error handling. It is sufficient for an agent to correctly select and invoke the 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%, requiring the description to compensate. It explains node_id as 'The Z-Wave node id, e.g. 5,' providing a concrete example. For a single integer parameter, this adds sufficient meaning beyond the schema's type definition.

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 'list[s] a node's configuration parameters and their current values,' specifying the verb 'list' and the resource 'configuration parameters.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like zwave_set_config_parameter (which sets parameters) and zwave_node_info (general node info).

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 explicitly tells the agent to use zwave_set_config_parameter for setting a parameter, providing a clear alternative. It also notes that a ValueError is raised for unknown node IDs, guiding appropriate usage. However, it does not list other context-specific exclusions.

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