vrm_get_data_attributes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions filtering and sorting (parameter behavior) but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any performance implications, or side effects. Given sibling tools are mostly 'get' operations, it's likely read-only, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is concise but could be slightly more informative about return type or usage context without losing efficiency.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core purpose and parameter intent but lacks behavioral transparency and usage guidelines, which are needed for completeness in a tool with four parameters and many siblings.

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 100% with descriptions for all four parameters. The description adds 'filtering and sorting options', confirming the parameters' purpose, but does not provide syntax or format details beyond the schema. This meets the baseline for well-documented parameters.

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 it retrieves system-wide data attributes, with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('data attributes'). 'System-wide' distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve specific entities (e.g., alarms, battery summary). However, 'data attributes' is somewhat vague compared to more specific names.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not specify that this tool is for generic attribute retrieval, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone. No exclusion criteria or sibling comparisons.

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