get_devices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately describes a read-only listing operation with no side effects. While it doesn't discuss permissions or limits, the behavior is straightforward and the description is sufficient.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the verb, resource, and output fields. The second sentence adds value by pointing to an alternative. No wasted words.

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's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is complete. It specifies exactly what data is returned (id, model, serial, firmware version) and contrasts with a relevant sibling tool. No additional information is needed for an agent to correctly invoke this tool.

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?

There are no parameters in the input schema, and schema description coverage is 100% vacuously. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter information. It appropriately focuses on the tool's output.

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 specific verb 'List', the resource 'Garmin devices registered on the account', and the exact fields returned (id, model, serial, firmware version). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get_device_settings' by directing the agent to use that for single device configuration.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (to list all devices) and when not to (to get configuration of a single device, explicitly recommending 'get_device_settings'). This provides clear guidance for agent decision-making.

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