get_modsecurity_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It does disclose that the tool 'checks' and 'gets' status, implying a non-mutating read operation. However, it doesn't describe what 'domain status' entails (e.g., list of domains, enabled/disabled state) or any edge case behavior, such as what happens if ModSecurity is not installed.

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 sentence that is concise, front-loaded with the action ('Check'), and includes the clarifying parenthetical '(WAF)'. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose with no 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?

For a simple 0-parameter tool, the description covers the core purpose but leaves gaps. Since there is no output schema, the description should clarify what 'domain status' actually returns (e.g., per-domain enabled/disabled list) and the scope (all domains vs. current domain). The sibling tools enable_modsecurity_domain/disable_modsecurity_domain hint at per-domain status, but this is not explicit.

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 the schema provides no parameter information. The description adds meaningful context by clarifying that ModSecurity is a WAF and that the tool reports installation and domain status, which helps an agent understand the tool's purpose despite the empty schema. Baseline 4 for 0 params 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 uses specific verbs ('check', 'get') and a clear resource ('ModSecurity (WAF)') with scope ('domain status'), distinguishing it from sibling enable/disable modsecurity tools. However, it doesn't explicitly state whether 'domain status' refers to all domains, a specific domain, or the current context, leaving slight ambiguity.

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 checking the status of ModSecurity, which positions it as the read-only counterpart to the enable/disable modsecurity siblings. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the purpose itself gives reasonable usage context.

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