xr18_read_meters

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses useful behavior: results are in dB and channel indexing is zero-based with a 0-31 range. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe any other side effects, but 'Read' and the meter context imply a safe query.

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 compact sentences deliver the essential scope and the critical indexing constraint without filler. The information is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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 read tool with an output schema, the description covers the key invocation requirements: valid batch range, unit, and the conditional channel requirement. It does not specify what channel means for batches 1-9 or whether it is ignored, but the schema's default null and the stated batch-0 exception make the behavior reasonably inferable.

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. It adds meaningful semantics: batch_id accepts 0-9, channel is zero-based with range 0-31, and channel is required specifically when batch_id is 0. This goes beyond the bare schema by clarifying valid ranges and conditional requirements.

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 identifies the action (read) and resource (meter batch 0-9 in dB), which distinguishes it from generic tools like xr18_get and other channel/snapshot commands. It could be slightly more explicit about what a 'meter batch' represents, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives, and no sibling tools are mentioned. The only usage hint is the batch-0 channel requirement, which is parameter-specific rather than decision-oriented.

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