get_sensor

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the action without revealing any potential side effects, error conditions, access requirements, or return behavior. This is minimal and insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 single, concise sentence containing only the essential information. No filler or redundant content, and the key point (single sensor, device ID) is front-loaded.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the core operation. However, with no annotations, no output schema, and no usage guidance, it leaves out important context such as return format or expected behavior, making it merely adequate rather than fully complete.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaning by clarifying that the 'id' parameter refers to a device ID. Although the phrasing 'by device ID' could be clearer (e.g., whether it is the sensor's own ID or a related device ID), it still provides context beyond the bare schema property name.

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+resource: 'Get a single sensor's data by device ID.' It specifies 'single sensor' which distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'get_sensors' (plural). The phrasing is unambiguous and specific.

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 implies usage for retrieving one sensor via its device ID, but it does not explicitly contrast with 'get_sensors' or provide any when-not-to-use guidance. There is no mention of alternatives, making the guidance only implicit.

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