list_devices

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It implies read-only listing but does not mention that refresh forces an API call, whether authentication is required, or what the return structure looks like. The refresh behavior is only documented in the schema, not the description.

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?

A single concise sentence with the main action front-loaded and the optional filter appended. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundant details.

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 two-optional-boolean listing tool, the description plus schema is adequate. However, no annotations or output schema exist, and the description omits the cache-vs-refresh behavioral nuance and any high-level return shape information, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description's 'Optionally filter to show only temperature sensors' reinforces sensorsOnly but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' with the resource 'all discovered SwitchBot devices', clearly stating what the tool does. The optional temperature-sensor filter adds precise scope, and this clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on status, temperature, and control.

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 like get_device_status, get_all_temperatures, or get_api_status. The optional filter is parameter-level guidance, not tool-selection guidance, and there is no explicit when-not or alternative mentioned.

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