Unraid API upsDevices

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description is consistent with those. It adds value by naming the fields returned, which is especially helpful because there is no output schema, though it does not describe output structure or edge cases.

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 no filler. Every word contributes meaning, and the key action ('List') and resource ('UPS devices') appear immediately.

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?

With no parameters and strong read-only annotations, the description is nearly complete for a simple list operation. However, since there is no output schema, a brief note about whether it returns an array of per-device objects or an aggregate summary would further help the agent interpret the response.

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 0 parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to document parameters and correctly focuses on what the response will contain.

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 ('List') and identifies the resource ('UPS devices') plus the exact metrics returned: state, battery health, runtime, voltage, load, and power. This clearly separates it from siblings like query_ups_device_by_id (single device) and query_ups_configuration (configuration, not runtime state).

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for retrieving UPS runtime/state information, especially since it is a read-only list. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over query_ups_device_by_id or query_ups_configuration, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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