Inverter Status

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds that it 'gets' data (read operation) and lists output fields, but no additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply. It does not add context like permission requirements or data freshness.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. Front-loaded with purpose and differentiation. Every sentence adds value.

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 the tool's complexity (8 parameters, output schema exists), the description is complete: it specifies purpose, scope, and differentiation. The output schema covers return values, so description doesn't need more.

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 description coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all 8 parameters. The tool description does not elaborate on parameters; it relies on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 it gets standalone inverter data (specific resource: 'standalone inverters') and lists data types (AC output voltage, current, power, frequency, state, alarms). It distinguishes from sibling victron_vebus_status by specifying that for Multi/Quattro, use that tool instead.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool (standalone inverters) and when not to (Multi/Quattro), directing to an alternative tool. This provides clear context and prevents misuse.

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