nvr_get_detection_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full load, and it does well: it declares the operation read-only, states refusal behavior for unknown kinds and out-of-range channels, and explains the include_raw side effect (raw device reply under data.raw). Auth/rate-limit behavior is not covered, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and scope, then parameters, then edge-case behavior. The long kind enumeration is necessary because the schema supplies no enum, so it earns its space rather than being filler.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be re-explained, and the description only adds the data.raw note. It is essentially complete for a read tool, with only minor gaps around authentication or failure recovery.

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 0%, so the description must compensate and does: it documents the channel range (1-16), enumerates all twelve valid kind values, and defines include_raw's default effect and output location. Every parameter is meaningfully specified.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (detection configuration) scoped to exactly one channel (1-16) and one detection kind. This cleanly separates it from adjacent config readers like nvr_get_video_config and nvr_get_image_config without opening a schema.

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?

Usage is implied — fetch detection config for a given channel/kind — but the description never says when to prefer this over siblings such as nvr_get_module_spec or nvr_call, nor does it name exclusions. The 'read-only' marker gives context but no routing guidance.

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