ha_list_helpers

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

The description implies a read-only operation by stating 'List all input helpers', but with no annotations, it fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, return format, or pagination. The behavior is straightforward but underexplained.

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, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and lists the relevant types without any extra words or repetition.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is largely adequate. It covers the main functionality and filtering. However, it omits details about the output structure (e.g., whether it returns entity IDs or friendly names) and if there is any pagination or limit.

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 the optional 'domain' parameter described. The description adds value by listing all valid helper domain values, which is not in the schema property description. However, it does not explain the format expected for the parameter (e.g., exact string matching).

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 that the tool lists all input helpers and enumerates the supported types (input_boolean, input_number, etc.), making the purpose crystal clear and distinguishing it from sibling tools that list other entities.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ha_list_states or other list operations. It does not mention any prerequisites or limitations, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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