arch_battery_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It communicates that the tool reads battery status, capacity, and charging state, implying a read-only behavior. However, it does not disclose return format, units, or failure behavior. The output schema covers some of this, but the description itself is thin.

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, concise sentence that directly states what the tool does. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the verb 'Check.'

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, zero parameters, and the presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context. It names the key data points returned. It could mention units or typical values, but the output schema likely fills those gaps.

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 zero parameters, so the description has no parameter burden. Per the rubric, 0 parameters warrants a baseline of 4, and no additional parameter details are needed.

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 the specific verb 'Check' and clearly identifies the resource as 'battery status, capacity level, and charging state.' This precisely distinguishes it from all sibling tools, none of which are battery-related.

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 the tool is for checking battery information, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it or any alternatives. Since there are no battery-related siblings, the usage context is self-evident, but it lacks explicit when-to-use language.

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