lc_get_sensor_seal_status

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

Since no annotations are present, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It implies a read-only check but does not explicitly state that it does not modify sensor state, nor does it explain what 'sealed' means or what the response format is. More context is needed for safe invocation.

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, which is concise, but it is overly minimal to the point of being insufficient. While it avoids verbosity, it sacrifices essential details, so it earns a middle score.

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?

Given that the tool has two required parameters and no output schema, the description provides almost no help. It does not explain the parameters, the return value, or any side effects. An agent would be left guessing how to invoke it correctly.

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 adds no information about the required parameters 'oid' and 'sensor_id'. Without any semantic explanation, the agent cannot determine how to fill these fields correctly.

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 'Check whether one sensor is currently sealed' uses a specific verb ('check') and clearly identifies the resource ('sensor seal status'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like lc_get_sensor (general info) and lc_get_sensor_isolation_status (isolation status), making the purpose 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or any prerequisites. For a simple read operation, one might expect at least a note that it is non-destructive, but nothing is stated. This leaves the agent without context for selection.

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