sensor_poll

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations, noting that large data is saved as artifacts. However, this may contradict the readOnlyHint annotation (which implies no side effects), creating potential confusion. While the annotation barrier is lowered, the description does not reconcile this contradiction.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action and efficiently adds key detail. No superfluous text.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown), but the description does not explain the return value or how artifacts are handled. The mention of 'bounded local artifacts' raises questions about retrieval and lifecycle that go unanswered. Adequate but incomplete for a tool with side effects.

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 single parameter 'name' has no description in the schema, and the tool description does not clarify its meaning (e.g., sensor name or ID). With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate by adding semantic context.

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 action ('Poll') and the resource ('a sensor'), and adds specific context about handling large data ('large arrays and images are saved as bounded local artifacts'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sensor_attach and sensor_remove.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any context about prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the action verb.

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