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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, read-only, idempotent, closed-world operation. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying bring-your-own-model mode, zero provider calls, and no fallback to welance's model.

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 short and front-loaded, stating the version/ruleset and mode/tool availability immediately. Every sentence contributes to understanding what the status call returns.

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 no-parameter status tool with rich annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and mode semantics. It does not describe the exact return shape, but no output schema exists and the core context is present.

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 there are no parameter semantics for the description to explain. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate.

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 the tool reports which ruleset version is live, the operating mode, and the available tools. This is a clear status/discovery purpose, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings such as get_rules.

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 the tool is useful for confirming mode and available tools, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternative tools. The intended usage is inferable, not stated.

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