theory_surprise_devices

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

The word 'Return' implies a read-only operation, but there are no annotations or explicit statements about side effects. The description does not clarify whether this tool only fetches information or performs any additional action.

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, brief sentence that is easy to parse. The 'etc.' is slightly imprecise but the overall structure is concise.

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?

Without an output schema or further explanation, the description does not clarify what the returned devices actually are, how they are represented, or what the user should expect. It is too minimal for a standalone tool reference.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantic burden. The description does not need to explain parameter meanings.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Return the 7 surprise devices.' However, the term 'surprise devices' is undefined, and the parenthetical examples with 'etc.' leave the full set ambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool or how it differs from sibling theory tools. The description gives no context for selection.

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