Read current value

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that values include quality and timestamp, and are enriched with engineering units when available. It explains maxDepth behavior clearly. Could mention idempotency or error handling, but overall sufficient.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. First sentence states the core purpose, second adds crucial usage detail about depth and units. Every word earns its place.

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 read operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return fields (value, quality, timestamp) and parameter behavior. It is complete for this complexity level, though an example would be extra.

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 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds meaning: 'latest value' implies freshness, and 'maxDepth>1' clarifies composition beyond the schema's generic description. This provides context not available from schema alone.

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 it reads the latest value with quality and timestamp for one or more objects, using the verb 'read' and specifying the resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_history' (historical) and 'get_object' (metadata) by mentioning current values and composition depth.

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?

It guides on using maxDepth>1 to include sub-components, implying this tool is for current snapshots. However, it never explicitly says when not to use it or names alternatives, though the sibling context suggests differences from 'get_history' and 'watch_values'.

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