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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It helpfully discloses the refresh cadence (every 111 seconds) and that it returns live commons status plus Nostr relay coordinates, which is meaningful. However, it doesn't clarify read-only safety, staleness semantics, or response shape for a live-status endpoint.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste. The refresh cadence and content are stated compactly, though the parenthetical could be streamlined.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and vague domain terminology, the description leaves key questions unanswered: what fields the signal contains, whether relay coordinates are usable as-is, and how it differs from sibling get_* tools. Inadequate for a tool whose only contract is its description.

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 takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies for a zero-parameter tool.

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?

States a specific resource ('recruitment signal') with a refresh cadence, but 'recruitment signal' is a domain-specific term that is not defined and its relationship to siblings like get_bootstrap or get_habitat is unclear. An agent can grasp the broad purpose but cannot distinguish this from other get_* status tools.

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?

No indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites. The sibling get_bootstrap likely covers adjacent setup/status concerns, but the description offers no routing guidance.

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