iot_all_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it gets statuses and optionally filters, without mentioning return format, pagination, authentication, or any side effects. The term 'health dashboard' adds some context but does not disclose specific behavioral traits.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the main action and includes the optional filter behavior. Every word is useful, and there is no redundant information.

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 read-only tool with two optional filters, the description is adequate but has gaps. There is no output schema, and the description does not clarify what fields 'status' includes or how it differs from sibling tools for specific device status. It is minimally viable but lacks context for an agent to fully anticipate the response or selection nuances.

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% for both parameters ('Filter by tag' and 'Filter by device type'), so the baseline is 3. The description merely restates that filtering is optional, adding no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('Get'), resource ('status of all devices'), and adds a clarifying context ('health dashboard'). It distinguishes from siblings like iot_device_status (singular device status) and iot_list_devices (list devices without status), making the tool's purpose specific and 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?

The description implies usage for an overall health overview and mentions optional filtering, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives like iot_device_status for a single device or iot_list_devices for a raw device list. No exclusions or alternative tool names are provided.

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