add_storage_device

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

The phrase 'Changes state on Growatt's side' adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations by clarifying that the effect is external and server-side. It aligns with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and adds useful context about where the mutation occurs.

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, focused sentence that states the action, target, and side effect with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 description is adequate for a simple three-parameter tool with a full schema and output schema, but it omits usage context such as when to use it, whether the operation is idempotent, or what prerequisites must be met. The annotations cover safety, but the description alone does not fully prepare an agent for correct invocation in ambiguous situations.

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 the parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning to c_user_id, plant_id, or sn beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Attach') and resource ('storage (battery) device to a plant'), making the operation's intent immediately clear. It is naturally distinguishable from sibling tools like add_plant and add_datalogger because it names a different resource.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_plant or add_datalogger. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions that would route an agent to this tool.

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