Return a compact operational status summary plus minimal startup/readback snapshot. Use this as the one-call fallback when ChatGPT tool invocation is flaky.
| 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It conveys that the output is 'compact' and 'minimal', implying a low-overhead read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly state safety guarantees, side effects, or what 'snapshot' entails beyond the name, leaving some ambiguity.
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, each earning its place: the first defines the tool's core behavior, the second provides actionable usage guidance. It is front-loaded, concise, and free of filler.
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 zero-parameter complexity, presence of an output schema to describe return values, and the clear usage trigger, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and when to invoke it, leaving no obvious gaps.
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, which gives a baseline of 4 as per guidelines. The description correctly does not invent parameter details, and with an empty schema there is nothing further to explain.
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 a 'compact operational status summary plus minimal startup/readback snapshot', which is a specific verb+resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by positioning it as a 'one-call fallback' and using 'minimal', differentiating it from more comprehensive tools like startup_operator_snapshot.
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 explicitly specifies when to use the tool: 'Use this as the one-call fallback when ChatGPT tool invocation is flaky.' It provides clear usage context but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or cite alternative tools, so it misses the full 5 criterion.
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.
