list_robot_commands

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'historical commands' implying a read operation, but omits details like pagination behavior, sorting, effect on system, or any prerequisites. Minimal information is given.

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 brief, using a clear 'Args/Returns' structure. Every sentence is necessary, no redundancy. Perfectly concise for a simple listing tool.

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 description covers the basic purpose and parameters, but lacks detail on return format (vague 'dictionary containing list'), no mention of error handling, or relationship to other tools. Given the low complexity and no output schema, it is minimally adequate.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It does: defines 'serial_number' as 'the serial number of the target robot,' and clarifies 'page' and 'page_size' as pagination controls with defaults. This adds value beyond the schema's minimal titles.

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 'Lists historical commands sent to a robot,' providing a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling 'get_robot_command' (single command) and 'create_robot_command' (creation). However, it does not explicitly contrast with other listing tools.

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. No when-not-to-use or context dependencies are mentioned, leaving the agent without decision support.

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