Return the current canonical SVV snapshot. Use this for a fast overview instead of calling many separate tools.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read operation ('Return') and says 'fast overview,' but it does not explicitly mention side effects, safety, caching, or any potential caveats. This is a significant gap for a tool with no structured safety hints.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a usage note. Every sentence contributes value; there is no fluff or repetition.
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?
Given the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description covers the essentials: what it returns and when to use it. The only missing context is deeper behavioral detail, but the output schema fills the return-structure gap, making this nearly 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 input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate; no compensation is needed.
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 a specific verb ('Return') and a precise resource ('current canonical SVV snapshot'), making the tool's function clear. It also differentiates from siblings by positioning this as a fast overview instead of calling many separate tools, which is helpful for selection.
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?
Explicit guidance is given: 'Use this for a fast overview instead of calling many separate tools.' This tells the agent when to prefer it, though it does not name specific sibling tools or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Some tools overlap in purpose: latest_memory_snapshot, ops_status_summary, and startup_operator_snapshot all provide some form of current state, and agent_query overlaps with search for information retrieval. However, the descriptions clarify distinct intents (e.g., bounded vs. full document search, operational vs. canonical snapshot), so boundaries are mostly clear.
All tool names use lowercase snake_case, but they do not follow a consistent verb_noun pattern. Some names are single verbs (fetch, search) while others are noun compounds (latest_memory_snapshot, ops_status_summary). This mixed style is readable but not predictable.
With 7 tools, the set is well-scoped for a public-facing query and status facade. Each tool serves a distinct role (query, search, fetch, snapshots, status, self-check), and the count feels appropriate without excess or deficiency.
The tool set covers the core needs of a read-only public facade: asking questions, searching documents, fetching content, and retrieving status/snapshots. There is some redundancy among snapshot tools, but no major missing operation for the stated purpose.
