queue_overview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a read operation ('[READ]'), one-shot (no pagination), and platform-dispatched, listing specific metrics for redis and rabbitmq. This is valuable context beyond the schema, though it omits details on error handling and exact return format.

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 succinct and front-loaded with the core purpose. It uses clear paragraphing and an Args list, with every sentence contributing useful information. No wasted words.

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?

The tool has one optional parameter and no output schema. The description explains the purpose, platform-specific behavior, and parameter semantics. It does not describe the return structure or errors, but given the tool's simplicity and one-shot nature, the description is adequately 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?

Schema coverage is 0%: the input schema only provides name/type/default. The description compensates by explaining that 'target' is the broker target name from config and that omitting it uses the default, adding meaning not present in 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 the tool's purpose: 'One-shot summary: platform + version + backlog/memory/client health.' It uses a specific verb (summarize) and resource (queue/broker), and distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it is platform-dispatched across redis and rabbitmq, unlike more targeted tools like list_queues or rabbitmq_overview.

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 a quick high-level overview ('One-shot summary') and notes the default target behavior, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention exclusions. Sibling tools like RCA or detail tools are not referenced, leaving the choice to the agent's inference.

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