Get Unraid UPS status

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

Annotations already fully cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description adds minor context by enumerating the reported metrics, but it does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether all UPS devices are aggregated into one snapshot or whether the call fails when no UPS is connected. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single 13-word sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then packs the full list of returned data into a compact enumeration. Every word earns its place 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with full annotation coverage, the description is largely complete: it names the resource and the output domains. The main gaps are the absence of a return-format description (no output schema exists) and no differentiation from the UPS-related sibling tools, but these are minor for a stateless read operation.

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 nothing the description needs to document. Per the baseline for 0-param tools, the description is adequate; no parameter semantics are missing.

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') plus a clear resource ('connected UPS') and enumerates the exact data domains returned: status, battery, load, voltage, runtime, power, and configuration. This is specific and unambiguous, distinguishing it from general system-info tools.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The sibling list contains several closely related UPS tools (unraid_v4371_query_ups_devices, unraid_v4371_query_ups_device_by_id, unraid_v4371_query_ups_configuration, unraid_v4371_next_ups_updates), and the description does not tell an agent how to choose among them, especially given the overlap on 'UPS configuration'.

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