alexa_get_do_not_disturb

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered without the description. The phrase 'right now' adds a useful temporal cue that this is live state rather than configuration, but nothing is said about which devices are included, what identifies them in the result, or whether the call can fail when no session is active.

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 short sentence with no wasted words, and the key qualifier ('switched on right now') is front-loaded. It reads as a sentence fragment rather than an imperative verb phrase, which slightly weakens immediate recognizability as an action, but the compactness is otherwise good.

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 no-parameter read-only query this is close to sufficient, and annotations carry the safety profile. Since no output schema exists, the description would ideally hint at the return shape (e.g. a list of device names with DND enabled), which it only gestures at with 'which Alexa devices'.

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 takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and it correctly implies the query is global across all devices rather than parameterized.

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 states a specific resource (Alexa devices' Do Not Disturb / quiet mode state) and scope ('switched on right now'), so an agent knows this is a status query rather than a mutation. It does not explicitly name the sibling alexa_set_do_not_disturb as the write counterpart, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrasing: use this to read DND status, as opposed to alexa_set_do_not_disturb to change it. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of the setter alternative by name, and no prerequisites or context (e.g. whether a login session is required, as alexa_begin_login suggests).

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