zwave_node_values

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns multiple fields (id, command class, endpoint, property, reading, metadata) and raises ValueError for unknown node ids. It does not mention destructive actions, which is appropriate as the tool is read-only.

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 concise with two short sentences and a clear structure: purpose, return value summary, error note, and argument. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information (purpose, exclusion) is front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple with one required parameter and an output schema exists. The description fully covers the purpose, return fields, error condition, and parameter meaning, making it complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is 0% for node_id, but the description adds meaning by stating 'The Z-Wave node id, e.g. 5', providing a clear example and explanation. This compensates partially for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 lists a node's current values excluding configuration parameters, distinguishing it from the sibling tool zwave_node_config. It specifies the resource (node) and verb (list), and explicitly excludes configuration 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 explains when to use this tool (to list current values) and notes that configuration parameters are handled separately by zwave_node_config, providing a clear alternative. It also mentions ValueError for unknown node ids, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use.

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