get_device_solar_data

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Get' and 'Returns' imply a read-only operation, and the solar-capable-device constraint is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if a non-solar device is queried, leaving notable gaps.

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 front-loaded with the core action, then provides return context, applicability scope, and parameter documentation. The Args block is clean and useful. Slight redundancy between 'Get solar data' and 'Returns solar charging data' keeps it from being maximally concise.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values need not be explained in depth. For a two-parameter read tool with 0% schema description coverage, the description adequately covers both parameters and the key solar-capable-device constraint. Minor gaps remain around error behavior and non-solar device handling.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents both parameters meaningfully: device_id's source ('can be obtained from get_devices') and date's format ('YYYY-MM-DD'). It does not explain the anyOf integer/string device_id type, but it covers the essential parameter meaning.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get solar data for a specific device,' then clarifies the returned data as 'solar charging data.' It also scopes the tool to solar-capable devices, distinguishing it from the many sibling device and activity tools.

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?

It clearly states the applicability condition: 'Only applicable to solar-capable devices.' It also tells the agent where device_id comes from ('get_devices'). However, it does not name an alternative tool for non-solar devices or explain when not to use it beyond the solar-capability constraint.

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