get_sensor_history

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only status, rate limits, or data freshness. It only states the basic function without additional context.

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 concise, starting with a clear purpose statement, but the Args list partially duplicates schema information. It is front-loaded and efficient, but could be shortened if schema descriptions were provided.

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 explains parameters well for a data retrieval tool, including format and defaults. However, it does not mention pagination, ordering, or empty results behavior. An output schema exists but its content is not visible.

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?

With input schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates well by detailing parameter formats (sdate, edate as YYYY-MM-DD-HH-MM-SS), valid values for avg (0,300,3600,86400), and default for count (500).

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 'Get historic monitoring data for a sensor,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_sensors, get_channels, etc., which deal with different data.

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 explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. The usage is implied (historic data retrieval), but no exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance are provided.

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