get_all_plugs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does add useful behavioral context: the tool aggregates readings across all Plug Mini devices in one call. But it does not mention potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, error behavior, or what happens if no plugs are present. The read-only nature is reasonably implied by 'Get', and the description is not contradictory.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word earns its place, and 'at once' is the key disambiguating detail that separates it from a single-plug query.

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 zero-parameter, read-only batch retrieval tool, this description is largely complete: it states exactly what data is returned and from what scope. It does not specify the output format, units, or data structure, but given the simplicity of the tool and absence of an output schema, the core selection and invocation context is sufficient.

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 schema already fully covers this with an empty properties object. The description adds meaning by clarifying what readings are returned, so no parameter-level compensation is needed. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool.

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 names a specific verb ('Get'), a concrete resource ('power and energy readings'), and a clear target scope ('all SwitchBot Plug Mini devices at once'). It clearly differs from sibling tools like get_plug_status, which implies a single device, and get_all_temperatures, which targets temperatures instead of plug power/energy.

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 phrase 'from all SwitchBot Plug Mini devices at once' clearly communicates the bulk-collection use case, implying you should choose this over a single-device status tool. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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