discover_devices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal a persistent side effect ('remember their provider adapter'), but it does not explain what this means for state, reversibility, permissions, or what happens during discovery. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely mutates stored state.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase earns its place, and it communicates the core action and a key side effect efficiently.

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 is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema, but the description still lacks important context such as what the tool returns, how timeoutMs affects behavior, and what 'remember' means operationally. It is minimally viable but not 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the timeoutMs parameter at all. Although the parameter name and schema constraints are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no semantic value beyond the schema, so it fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 a specific action ('Discover smart appliances on the local network') and adds a distinguishing side effect ('remember their provider adapter'). This differentiates it from siblings like list_known_devices and discover_apps.

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 context: use this when you need to discover smart appliances on the local network. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as when to prefer list_known_devices or diagnose_discovery.

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