scan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that it is a diagnostic with 'No device action.' This reinforces the read-only nature and explains the tool's behavior (scanning BLE). It provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotation, though it does not detail failure modes or rate limits.

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 concise, with two sentences front-loaded with the key term 'Diagnostic.' Every word adds value, with no wasted information.

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 no parameters and the existence of an output schema, the description is complete. It provides enough context for an agent to understand when and why to use this diagnostic tool, and it covers the necessary behavioral aspects.

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 tool has no parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds full meaning by explaining that the tool performs a BLE scan with no arguments, which is clear and sufficient.

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 the tool's purpose: a diagnostic to check if the Flipper is advertising over BLE. It specifies the resource (Flipper) and the action (check BLE advertising), distinguishing it from siblings like 'ping' or 'device_info' which serve different diagnostic purposes.

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 when to use: for diagnosing connectivity when Flipper seems offline, and provides context (if not advertising, likely connected to phone or asleep). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives like 'ping'.

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