get_washer_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Get' clearly signals a read-only operation, and 'current live state' indicates a real-time query rather than a cached or historical read. It also discloses the reported fields, though it does not address error cases like offline devices.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every clause adds useful detail about the state fields returned.

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?

For a simple one-parameter status getter with an output schema, the description explains the purpose and key returned state fields well. It is slightly incomplete because it omits explicit device_id guidance and usage boundaries, but these are easy to infer from the schema and sibling names.

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%, and the description never mentions device_id or how it should be supplied. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds no value beyond the schema and does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), a resource ('washer's current live state'), and three concrete data points (running, cycle/run state, remaining time). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like get_washer_profile (static profile) and control_washer (mutation).

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 implied by the verb and the 'live state' phrasing, but the description does not explicitly say when to prefer this over get_washer_profile or mention that control_washer should be used for changing state. No exclusions or alternative conditions are stated.

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