scrub_status

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

The description explicitly marks the tool as '[READ]' and explains it decodes PG_NOT(_DEEP)_SCRUBBED, indicating it is a read-only operation. However, without annotations, more detail on side effects or performance impact would be beneficial; the current description is basic but adequate.

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 extremely concise, with one line for purpose and one for arguments. It is front-loaded with '[READ]' and uses a clear format. Every sentence contributes necessary information without superfluous text.

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 tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the core purpose and parameter adequately. It lacks details on return format or threshold for 'overdue', but given the tool's simplicity and no output schema, it is reasonably 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 schema provides no description for the 'target' parameter (0% coverage), but the description adds: 'Ceph target name from config; omit for the default.' This clarifies the parameter's meaning and default behavior, adding significant value beyond the schema.

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 '[READ] PGs overdue for shallow / deep scrub', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like trigger_scrub and trigger_deep_scrub, which are action-oriented, and other status tools like pg_dump_stuck, which focus on stuck PGs rather than overdue scrubs.

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 usage for checking overdue scrub PGs but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pg_dump_stuck or trigger_scrub. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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