apex_duty_cycle

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does disclose the computed outputs, but says nothing about the aggregation window, data resolution/sampling, retention limits, or whether the outlet argument accepts a name versus an ID. For a read-only analytics tool this is a moderate gap rather than a critical one.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the concrete return metrics, and the second sentence adds a use-case cue rather than restating the name. No filler.

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?

The output schema covers the return shape and only two parameters exist, but the description omits the meaning of the time window and how outlets are identified, which an agent needs in order to call it correctly. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate and does not. The `days` parameter (the averaging window, default 1) is never mentioned, and the description never explains that `outlet` identifies the outlet by name or ID — the phrase "percent of time" leaves the time window entirely ambiguous.

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 names the resource (an outlet) and the exact metrics returned: percent-on time, run count, and mean run length. That is specific enough to separate it from siblings like apex_outlet_events (raw events) or apex_get_outlets (outlet list), though the operative verb is only implied by the noun phrase rather than stated.

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?

"Good for heaters and ATO pumps" hints at the intended use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative (e.g., use apex_outlet_events for raw on/off transitions). The agent must infer the boundary from sibling names alone.

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