changedetection_get_diff

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the REST endpoint and output format choices, but says nothing about diff size, truncation, or what the response body looks like for a read-only diff operation.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the endpoint and key parameter hints. The raw endpoint path is mildly redundant but does add routing context without bloat.

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?

For a 12-parameter tool with 25% schema coverage and no output schema, the description leaves too much unsaid — most notably the diff-filtering booleans that materially change results. An agent cannot confidently compose a call beyond the three required parameters.

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 coverage is only 25% across 12 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It explains from_timestamp/to_timestamp and format (which the schema already documents), but leaves eight parameters — type, added, removed, replaced, no_markup, word_diff, changesOnly, ignoreWhitespace — completely unexplained.

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?

"Diff two snapshots" states a specific verb and resource, and the endpoint path makes the scope (one watch, two timestamps) concrete. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_snapshot, though the description never names that alternative explicitly.

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 hints that from_timestamp may be 'previous' and to_timestamp may be 'latest' imply the intended common usage (compare last two snapshots). However, there is no explicit statement of when to call this versus get_snapshot or list_history, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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