Get Things Connectivity Status

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: 'Things that have never connected are omitted from the response', which is not inferable from annotations. This helps the agent understand an important data inclusion rule.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no redundant information. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds an essential behavioral detail. Every word serves a purpose.

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's simplicity (single parameter, read-only, output schema provided), the description covers the key behavioral point about omitted never-connected things. It doesn't need to explain return values due to output schema. Minor improvement could mention ordering or scope, but it is complete enough for effective use.

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 100%, with the 'ids' parameter clearly described as 'Thing UUIDs to fetch connectivity status for'. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond confirming batch operation, so baseline score 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 verb 'Get', the resource 'connectivity status', and the action 'for a batch of things by their IDs'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_things_flapping' and 'get_things_status_summary' by focusing on current status per thing. The specific behavioral note about omitted never-connected things adds clarity.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_things_status_summary' or 'get_things_flapping'. While the purpose implies it is for per-thing status with specific IDs, no direct comparison or usage context is given, leaving agents to infer usage.

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