read_temperature

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond them: the reading comes from a specific Pt100 probe and returns a unit plus a UTC timestamp, telling the agent how to interpret the value. It does not mention error behavior when the probe is absent, keeping it below a 5.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the sensor, the value, and the returned metadata are all stated compactly.

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 an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description only needs to frame the operation, which it does. The remaining gap is that it never positions itself relative to the closely named sibling 'sample_temperature'.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no per-parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for a 0-param tool applies. The description correctly implies no input is needed.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read the current temperature from the Pt100 probe') plus the returned fields (unit, UTC timestamp). It does not differentiate itself from the sibling 'sample_temperature', so an agent must infer whether it is a single read vs. a sampling routine.

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 word 'current' implies a single instantaneous reading, which hints at when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over 'sample_temperature' or 'read_resistance', and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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