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

The description adds detail about the output but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or potential side effects. The readOnlyHint annotation covers the main non-mutating aspect, but no extra context is provided.

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, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output without unnecessary details. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 read-only getter with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns. It does not require additional context to be usable.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema coverage is complete (empty schema). The description does not need to elaborate on parameters, so this meets the baseline expectation.

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 tool returns the current toolkit state and enumerates the specific details included (installed MCPs, connection status, accounts, and catalog tool counts). This makes the purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like 'show_version'.

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 for retrieving toolkit state, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or contrast it with alternatives. Since no sibling tool is closely related, this is adequate but not explicit.

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