tb_get_alarms

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Get active alarms' without explaining what 'active' means, whether the filter is applied, the response format, or any side effects. This is minimal beyond the basic function.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and succinct.

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 operation with two well-documented parameters, the description is adequate. However, the absence of an output schema and any behavioral context means the agent must infer what the returned alarms look like and how 'active' is defined. This is a modest gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 covers 100% of parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameters (severity filter, device_id context). The schema adequately defines their purpose.

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 uses a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('active alarms from ThingsBoard'), accurately conveying the tool's function. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from other alarm-related sibling tools like 'dss_list_alarms' or 'dahua_nvr_alarms', though the 'ThingsBoard' qualifier provides some differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it retrieves alarms for a specific device (despite 'device_id' being required), nor does it contrast with similar alarm-listing tools. This leaves the agent without context for selection.

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