Trigger an on-demand configuration collection for a device instance to retrieve current config data without waiting for scheduled collection.
Trigger an on-demand config collection for a device instance
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| device_id | Yes | Device ID | |
| instance_id | Yes | Instance ID | |
| device_datasource_id | Yes | Device-DataSource ID for the ConfigSource |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, and the description aligns with those by framing the call as a trigger. It adds the target and on-demand nature, but does not disclose whether collection is asynchronous, how long it takes, or what side effects occur.
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 sentence with no filler. The action verb is front-loaded and every word contributes to conveying the core operation.
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?
With no output schema, the description should state what the invocation returns or whether the collection runs asynchronously and requires polling. It also omits any post-condition, leaving an agent unable to verify whether the triggered collection succeeded.
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 fully documents all three parameters, including the clarifying 'Device-DataSource ID for the ConfigSource' description. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, but the high schema coverage means it does not need to.
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 action verb ('Trigger') and identifies the resource ('on-demand config collection') and target ('device instance'). This distinguishes it from sibling retrieval operations like get_device_config and get_configsource.
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 call this tool versus related siblings such as get_device_config, get_configsource, or create_configsource. No alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.