cpu_temp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It only mentions the source plugin and unit but does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what the return format is, or any potential errors. For a sensor read, minimal behavioral detail is a gap.

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, extremely concise and front-loaded with the key information (CPU temperature in °C). It earns its place with no filler.

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?

Although the tool is simple, it has no output schema. The description tells what it does and the unit, but not the exact return type or any additional context (e.g., whether it's the current temperature or average). For a minimal tool, this is adequate but could be more complete.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema is empty. The description adds no parameter details, but since there are none, the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameters.

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 states 'CPU temperature in °C', clearly identifying the resource (CPU temperature) and unit. It lacks an explicit verb like 'gets' or 'reports', but the meaning is unambiguous. It also distinguishes from siblings like 'disk_temperatures' by specifying CPU and mentioning the OMV CpuTemp plugin.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'sensors_readout' or 'disk_temperatures'. The description is purely descriptive with no context or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction.

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