bi_get_actionset

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses detailed decoding behavior, unmapped-value fallthrough with raw ints preserved, and a staleness caveat tied to .reg export source. This gives the agent an accurate model of what the call will and won't reflect.

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 dense sentences, each earning its place: purpose, decoding detail, fallback behavior, and data-source caveat. The main purpose is front-loaded, and no content is redundant with the schema.

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 complex read-only decoder with no output schema, the description is complete: it names the decoded fields, bitmask groups, raw fallbacks, and the source/staleness limitation. An agent has enough context to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the shaped-output contents and raw fallthrough, which clarifies the meaning of the raw flag, and by enumerating hook-related fields (OnTrigger/OnReset) that map to the hook parameter.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Return the semantic action set (OnTrigger and/or OnReset) for a camera.' This precisely identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling getters that target alerts, clips, config, or PTZ status.

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 purpose is unambiguous, and the caveat about .reg export data implies it is for inspecting exported action sets rather than live UI state. However, it never names an alternative tool or explicitly states when not to use it, so it falls short of full routing guidance.

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