AC Genset Status

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

Annotations indicate a safe read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds value by listing specific data points (3-phase AC, engine parameters, error codes) and supported controller brands, providing useful context beyond annotations. 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 a single concise sentence covering purpose, data points, and a usage hint. No redundancy, but could be structured into bullet points for clarity.

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 high schema coverage, annotations, and presence of output schema, the description is complete enough. It covers purpose, data, brands, and suggests discover tool. Lacks differentiation from sibling victron_generator_status but otherwise sufficient.

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?

All 8 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage). The description does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema; it mentions unit ID default and transport default, but these are already in schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states that the tool gets AC generator/genset controller data and lists specific controller brands (Fischer Panda, ComAp, etc.) and many measured parameters. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like victron_dcgenset_status and victron_generator_status.

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 mentions using victron_discover to find the unit ID, which provides a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over similar siblings like victron_generator_status or victron_dcgenset_status, and lacks conditions for non-use.

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