Get System Info

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description adds critical behavioral details: role-based visibility (version/serial/address only for ADMIN) and reporting of active login user and inferred role. This fully informs the agent of potential variability in output.

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 a compact single paragraph that efficiently conveys the main purpose, key outputs, and critical admin-dependency nuance without redundancy. Minor improvement could be structuring with bullet points, but not necessary.

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?

Given the tool has only one optional parameter, high schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description adequately covers all relevant aspects: what data is returned, admin restrictions, and build info. It is complete for effective agent understanding.

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 description (100% coverage) for the single 'target' parameter. The tool description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves CCU system information including firmware version, serial number, addresses, login user, role, and build info. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on system-level data rather than device or connection info.

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 context on when to use the tool (getting system information) and includes important caveats like admin-dependent fields showing 'N/A' for non-admin users. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools but the specificity is clear.

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