get_sensor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get' implies read-only retrieval and the 'including state, config, and capabilities' clause clarifies the return scope. However, it does not mention behavior for invalid IDs, permission requirements, or any side-effect guarantees.

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 compact and front-loaded: one clear purpose sentence immediately followed by a concise Args note. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool 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?

This is a simple single-parameter getter with an output schema present, and the description covers purpose, return scope, and parameter discovery. It does not cover error cases or explicitly state read-only behavior, but nothing essential for invoking it correctly appears to be missing.

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 explain sensor_id, and it does: it identifies the parameter as a numeric sensor ID and points to list_sensors for discovery. There is a minor mismatch, though: the schema types sensor_id as a string while the description calls it numeric.

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 states a specific action ('Get full details') on a specific resource ('a specific sensor') and lists the returned content categories (state, config, capabilities). This clearly distinguishes it from list_sensors and other per-resource getters like get_light or get_group.

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 advises using list_sensors to discover IDs, providing useful guidance for when the ID is unknown. It does not explicitly name exclusions or alternative getters, but the usage context for a single-sensor retrieval tool is reasonably clear.

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