Get sensor readings

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: fallback to deprecated Thermal inline arrays, the exact return shape (sensors_uri vs fallback), and list wrapping format. This fully discloses behavior.

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, with no wasted sentences. It covers purpose, alternatives, return format, fallback behavior, and an example in just four lines, all of which are necessary.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (read-only, 3 optional params) and the presence of an output schema, the description is fully sufficient. It explains return formats, fallback conditions, and usage examples, leaving no important 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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, providing a strong baseline. The description contributes an example call showing how chassis_uri and limit are used together, which adds practical parameter semantics beyond the schema definitions.

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 opens with 'Fetch broad cross-domain sensor data from Sensors collection', clearly stating the verb and resource. It also explicitly distinguishes this tool from get_thermal and get_power, preventing ambiguity among sibling tools.

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?

It gives explicit alternative usage instructions: 'Use get_thermal for cooling details and get_power for PSU/power metrics.' This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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