Fans and temperatures

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotent, but the description adds useful behavioral context: it explains that iDRAC 8 lacks Redfish fan-speed control, so the agent knows writing fan speeds is impossible. It also enumerates what is included (thresholds, redundancy) without contradicting annotations.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the primary resource and data content, followed by a concise limitation. No wasted verbiage; 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?

For a read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately specifies what is returned (fan RPM, temperature locations, thresholds, redundancy) and notes the read-only limitation. It could have mentioned return format or granularity, but missing output schema means the description carries enough for invocation.

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% and there is only one parameter (include_thresholds) fully documented in the schema. The description mentions thresholds conceptually but does not clarify the parameter's effect (e.g., default behavior or what happens when false), so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns current fan speeds and temperature readings, including specific data points (inlet, exhaust, CPUs) and metadata (thresholds, redundancy). It does not explicitly differentiate from idrac_health, which likely also reports thermal status, but the scope is unambiguous.

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 content description (this tool provides fan and temperature data), but there is no explicit statement of when to use it versus idrac_health or idrac_power, nor any exclusions. The read-only note adds context but not a usage directive.

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