get_device_parameter

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It correctly implies a read-only operation (getting values), but does not mention any side effects, authentication needs, error cases (e.g., invalid indices), or the exact return format. The description is minimally adequate but lacks depth.

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 communicates the core functionality without any fluff. It is front-loaded with the action and outputs, making it easy to scan.

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 has 4 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return structure (e.g., format of value, range, quantized states) or how to identify the parameter (by name or index). The description is too brief to fully guide an agent in invoking the tool correctly.

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 0% description coverage for its parameters, and the description does not explain what track_index, device_index, and parameter represent or how they should be used. The parameter field accepts both string and integer, but no guidance is given. The description adds no value beyond the schema's structural definition.

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 retrieves a device parameter's current value, range, and quantized states. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('device parameter'), and the stated outputs distinguish it from sibling tools like list_device_parameters (which lists all parameters) and set_device_parameter (which sets a value).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or list any prerequisites or context. For example, it could have noted to use list_device_parameters first to find parameter names.

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