espconnect_list_devices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries responsibility for disclosing behavior. It states a list operation but does not mention required parameters, return format, potential side effects, or any prerequisites. The phrase 'List all' hints at a read-only operation, but deeper behavioral context is missing.

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 very short and front-loaded, but it is essentially a tautology of the tool name. It lacks useful structure or elaboration, making it minimally informative rather than concisely rich.

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 simple list tool has no output schema, so the description should convey what the response contains or how the device_id parameter is used. It does neither, leaving the agent without enough context to understand the tool's full behavior or its relationship to siblings.

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?

The input schema already fully documents the only parameter (device_id) with a description. The tool description adds no meaning about this parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'ESPConnect devices', making the tool's function obvious. However, it does little more than restate the tool name, so it lacks additional specification that would fully distinguish it from similar list tools for other platforms.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling list_devices tools, there is no contextual information about preferring this for ESPConnect or excluding others.

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