simplisafe_get_settings

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only nature. The description adds value by listing the exact scope of returned data (settings and health) and explicitly stating what is excluded (PINs). This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them, though it doesn't discuss other behavioral aspects like error conditions or rate limits.

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 two sentences with no fluff. The core purpose and content are front-loaded, and the exclusion/alternative is stated efficiently at the end. Every phrase contributes value, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what is returned, which it does thoroughly by listing the settings and health items. It also clarifies the scope (not PINs). The only minor gap is not addressing the relationship with simplisafe_healthcheck, but for a simple read tool, this is largely 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 input schema provides full coverage of the single parameter 'sid' with a clear description, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or context about the parameter, leaving it entirely to the schema.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Get base-station settings for a system' and enumerates the specific items included (entry/exit delays, alarm volume, etc.). It also explicitly differentiates from simplisafe_get_pins by noting what it does not include, giving strong sibling differentiation.

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 an explicit exclusion and alternative for PINs ('Does not include PINs — use simplisafe_get_pins for those'). However, it does not address potential overlap with simplisafe_healthcheck (which may also cover health status) or when to prefer this over simplisafe_get_system. So guidance is present but not exhaustive.

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