grocy_batteries_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds that each entry carries a next estimated charge time, but says nothing about ordering, empty results, or pagination behavior.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the raw endpoint. Everything earns its place, though the endpoint restates the operation for little added value.

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 zero-parameter read-only list tool with annotations covering the safety profile, this is sufficient to call correctly. With no output schema, it could say slightly more about what a battery record contains, which keeps it from a 5.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description correctly implies the tool takes no filters. Nothing is left ambiguous about inputs.

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 clear verb-and-resource pair ('All batteries') plus the salient data point returned ('next estimated charge time'), which separates it from the mutation siblings like grocy_battery_charge. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from grocy_battery_get, so it stops short of a 5.

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 list framing implies usage, but there is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over grocy_battery_get (single battery) or other list tools. The reader must infer that this is the bulk-retrieval option.

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