vaillant_get_diagnostics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states 'Read-only', which indicates safety but omits details like whether it's a point-in-time snapshot, any performance implications, or authentication requirements.

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 of 18 words, front-loading the main purpose and then elaborating succinctly. Every word is necessary with no redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description partially compensates by naming the two return categories and their sub-items. However, it lacks detail on the 'system_id' parameter and return format, leaving gaps.

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 provides no information about the only parameter 'system_id'. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain its purpose or usage, leaving the agent uninformed about how to invoke the tool 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 clearly states that the tool retrieves a 'Diagnostic snapshot' and splits it into two categories: engineering_config and volatile_state, listing specific attributes. This distinguishes it from sibling tools (vaillant_get_devices, vaillant_get_energy_report, vaillant_get_status) which target different data.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. While the purpose implies it's for diagnostics, no guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided. Sibling tools differ in data type, but no comparison is given.

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