Get component controls

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool lists controls and values, implying a read operation, but does not mention permissions, rate limits, or whether the operation is destructive. Minimal behavioral context.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, the second gives actionable guidance. Well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Covers basic purpose and parameter usage, but omits details like return format (list of objects?), error handling (e.g., component not found), or whether all controls are returned. For a tool with no output schema, more context is needed for complete understanding.

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 covers 100% of parameter descriptions. The description adds value by explaining why to use filter and names_only ('to trim large components'), which helps the agent decide when to apply those parameters.

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 lists a named component's controls and current values, with the specific API call 'Component.GetControls'. It distinguishes from siblings like qsys_get_control (single control) and qsys_list_components (list all components).

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?

Provides a usage tip for the filter and names_only parameters to handle large components, but lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., qsys_get_control for a single control) or when not to use it.

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