Set intervals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety and repeat-call behavior are covered. The description adds one genuinely useful non-obvious trait — a short report interval drains battery when unplugged — but says nothing about whether the device must be online, whether changes apply immediately, or whether intervals affect already-stored history.

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?

Two tight sentences: purpose first, then the battery tradeoff that affects how the agent should choose report_interval_min. No filler, no restating of the title.

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?

With a full-coverage schema and annotations carrying the safety profile, the description only needs purpose plus the operational caveat, both of which are present. The remaining gap is preconditions for a write against physical hardware (device reachability, effect timing), which an agent would otherwise have to guess.

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%, and the schema already states 'Measure every N minutes' and 'Upload to the cloud every N minutes', so the description's collect/report mapping is largely redundant. The optional 'device' parameter is not mentioned at all in the description.

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?

Names a specific verb ('Changes') and two specific resources ('measurement (collect)' and 'cloud upload (report) intervals of a Qingping sensor'), and even disambiguates the collect/report naming. It does not reference any sibling tool, but the write-to-device scope makes it clearly distinct from the read-oriented qingping_current/history/alerts.

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 the tool for tuning sampling/upload frequency. There is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, no prerequisites (device online, plugged in, account permissions), and no mention of alternatives such as reading current settings first via qingping_current.

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