get_device_parameter_display

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

No annotations are provided. The description only indicates the return type (display string) but does not disclose potential failures (e.g., invalid indices), read-only nature, or side effects. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words. It provides a clear example and is appropriately front-loaded.

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 simple tool with an output schema (though not shown), the description is minimally adequate. However, the lack of parameter documentation and usage guidance makes it incomplete for an agent unfamiliar with the domain.

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 input schema has three parameters (track_index, device_index, parameter_index) with no descriptions. The schema coverage is 0% and the description does not explain what these indices refer to or how to obtain them. The description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'human-readable display string for a parameter value', with concrete examples like '2500 Hz'. This distinguishes it from related tools such as get_device_parameter_value (raw value) and get_device_parameter_range (range info).

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 implies usage for obtaining a formatted display string, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_device_parameter_value. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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