nvr_get_time

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and does disclose two meaningful traits: the operation is read-only and include_raw places the raw reply at data.raw. It omits any auth requirement (relevant given the nvr_login sibling), which keeps it from 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?

Two tight sentences, purpose front-loaded in the first clause and the parameter detail second. Nothing is wasted and the read-only qualifier is placed where it is immediately visible.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers purpose, safety posture and the one parameter. Only the missing usage/alternative guidance and auth context keep it below 5 for a tool embedded in a large family of getters.

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% for the single include_raw boolean, so the description must compensate, and it does: it explains exactly what setting include_raw=true does and where the extra data appears. This meaning is absent from the schema itself.

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 resource (device time, time zone, NTP and DST configuration) with an implied read verb, which clearly distinguishes it from storage/network/video siblings. It does not explicitly name what separates it from adjacent getters like nvr_get_device_info or nvr_get_system_info, so it stops short of 5.

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 '(read-only)' tag hints that this is a safe fetch, but there is no statement of when to call this tool versus the many other nvr_get_* getters, and no prerequisites are given. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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