discover

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It discloses MQTT topic filter usage and default scope behavior (all vs. group), but does not explicitly state read-only nature, return format, or permission requirements. 'Discover' implies non-mutating, but specifics are limited.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

For a simple one-parameter discovery tool with no output schema, the description covers the primary scenario, optional behavior, and domain scope. It lacks return-shape details, but the tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaningful semantics for the 'group' parameter: it is a device GROUP, used when status of a group is requested, and optional with a clear default. It does not provide format examples, but compensates well for the schema gap.

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 tool 'discover[s] devices and rules' scoped by group or entire domain, using an MQTT topic filter. This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from siblings publish and query.

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?

Provides clear usage context: use a device GROUP when asking status of a group, and omit group to discover everything in the domain. It does not explicitly name alternate tools or when-not-to-use, but the guidance is practical and distinct.

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