get_sensor_realtime

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'real-time' but does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, whether it requires authentication, or what side effects (if any) exist. The 'etc.' leaves the exact data content ambiguous.

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 with parenthetical examples that clarify scope. Every word earns its place; no fluff or redundancy. It is appropriately concise for a simple data retrieval tool.

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 there is no output schema and only one optional parameter, the description should explain what the tool returns and how the parameter alters behavior. It fails to do so—the user does not learn what MinMaxSensorData means or whether the response includes all sensor types. The description is minimally viable but leaves significant 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 input schema covers 100% of the parameter (dataCollection) with a description and enum values, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning about how dataCollection influences the result; it merely lists example data types without linking them to the parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies a clear resource ('real-time sensor data') with concrete examples (temperature, irradiance, wind). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_inverter_realtime or get_meter_realtime, which target different device types.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling real-time data tools. No context about typical scenarios, exclusions, or alternatives is provided. The description merely states what it does without any usage direction.

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