bosch_camera_recording_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It describes a read operation returning a boolean, and mentions the API endpoint. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, nor does it disclose any error conditions or auth requirements. The return type is mentioned, which is good.

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 short and to the point, with two sentences and an API line. It is front-loaded with the purpose. The API endpoint adds useful context, though it could be omitted if not needed. No redundancy.

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 get tool with one parameter and an output schema (mentioned in context), the description is adequate. It explains the return value and the single capability. However, it could mention that it only gets audio recording options (since that's the only field returned), but the description already implies that.

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 has one required parameter 'camera' with no description (0% schema coverage). The description says 'for one camera' but does not clarify what format or identifier is expected (e.g., camera ID, name). This leaves ambiguity for the agent.

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 gets cloud recording options for one camera and specifies the return value (sound_on). The verb 'get' and the resource 'cloud recording options' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like recording_set.

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. It does not mention any prerequisites, limitations, or when to avoid using it. Sibling tools exist (e.g., recording_set) but no comparison is made.

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