obsbot_tail2_devices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses the critical caveat that offline cameras still appear, and that the MAC is the identity to pass as `camera` to other obsbot_tail2_* tools. It does not discuss ordering, caching, or error behavior, keeping it just short of 5.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the identity/scope claim, then the return shape, then the routing caveat. No filler or restated name.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description rightly names the returned fields (mac, name, hosts); combined with the liveness caveat and cross-tool `camera` usage, an agent has enough to call and interpret it. Minor gaps (ordering, empty-list behavior) remain unstated.

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?

There are zero input parameters, so the baseline is 4; nothing needs documenting. The description instead adds meaning to the output fields (mac as identity, name, host answers), which is useful but not strictly parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List registered OBSBOT Tail 2 cameras') and immediately scopes it as network cameras keyed by MAC. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like obsbot_tail2_status (liveness) and obsbot_devices (presumably other device families).

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?

Explicitly names the alternative and its selection condition: 'Registration is not liveness... use obsbot_tail2_status to check one is reachable.' It tells the agent both when this tool suffices and when to switch tools.

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