sparkplug_node_list

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context: it details the internal model built from BIRTH/DATA/DEATH/STATE topics, explains what 'online' means, and lists return fields including seq gaps and primary host state. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with summary, parameter doc, return structure, and example. It is slightly verbose (e.g., repeating 'builds the birth/death + seq model'), but every sentence adds value given the complex domain. Could be tightened, but still effective.

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 complexity of Sparkplug and lack of output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return dict structure with all nested fields. It covers parameter behavior, default values, and provides an example. No gaps remain for an agent to select and invoke this tool 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates fully with detailed explanations for each parameter (endpoint from config, timeout_s range 1-60, count 1-500) and their purpose. Includes an example invocation, making parameter usage crystal clear.

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 explicitly states the tool discovers edge nodes/devices and online state plus primary-host state, using specific Sparkplug topics. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like sparkplug_subscribe_sample or sparkplug_decode_payload by focusing on node listing.

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 explains use cases via the example and parameter guidance (e.g., longer timeout for infrequent nodes), but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives among the many Sparkplug-related siblings. The context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate use.

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