solaredge_diagnosis

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. It only describes the output content, which is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 concise with two sentences plus a line for parameters. It is front-loaded with the key purpose ('System health:'). However, it could be more structured, e.g., by separating parameter details more clearly.

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 two optional parameters and an output schema. The description covers the main output categories and the check_type values, but lacks detail on the effect of 'include_recommendations' and does not address usage context like time ranges or prerequisites. Given the existence of an output schema, some gaps are acceptable, but overall completeness is moderate.

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 description adds value for the 'check_type' parameter by listing possible values ('health|performance|comprehensive') that are not present in the input schema. However, the 'include_recommendations' parameter is not explained, and schema coverage is 0%, so the description only partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 tool's purpose: diagnosing system health including inverter status, firmware, data freshness, and optionally battery state of charge and health. It distinguishes from sibling tools like energy_analysis, forecast, and live_status, which focus on different aspects.

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 for health diagnosis but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus its siblings or when not to use it. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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