get_sub_device_telemetry

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral burden; it does disclose the read-only nature ('Read') and the result ordering ('newest first'), which is real value beyond the schema. However, it says nothing about pagination behavior beyond the limit cap, rate limits, or error cases for unknown ids.

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?

A single tight sentence with the resource and ordering front-loaded and zero filler. Every word earns its place.

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 query tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, and ordering adequately. The main omission is guidance on the limit/since interplay and how to page further, which is minor for this complexity level.

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%, so all five parameters (deviceId, subDeviceId, limit, since, metric) are already documented in the schema, including the default of 100 for limit and the Unix-ms meaning of since. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or constraints, so the baseline 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?

States a clear verb ('Read') and resource ('one sub-device's telemetry history') and adds a useful scope/order detail ('newest first'). It implicitly distinguishes this from get_device_telemetry and get_latest_telemetry by specifying a single sub-device and a full history, though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for retrieving historical readings from one sub-device, but the description never says when to choose it over get_latest_telemetry (latest only) or get_device_telemetry (master device). No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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