subunit_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the output concerns 'closed' crosspoints, but it does not state whether this is a read-only query, whether it requires special access, or whether it has side effects.

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 very short with no wasted words, but it is a sentence fragment and omits a verb and key context. It is concise at the cost of under-specification.

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 tool with two required parameters, no annotations, and no parameter descriptions, this fragment omits the operation, parameter semantics, and any behavioral context. The output schema may cover return shape, but the calling context remains unclear.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description only restates 'one subunit' and adds no meaning for the required card parameter. It does not explain how to identify the subunit, what card refers to, or what values are valid.

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 phrase identifies a resource—closed crosspoints on one subunit—and hints at a scope difference from crosspoint_state, but it is a noun fragment with no verb. It does not explicitly state whether the tool lists, retrieves, or summarizes that state.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives. The word 'every' weakly implies enumeration, but the description never tells an agent when to choose this tool over crosspoint_state or set_crosspoint.

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