system_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the permission requirement 'Requires system.read', which is useful, but it does not disclose other traits such as whether the call is read-only, response format, or potential performance impact. The information provided is minimal but not misleading.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action ('Get system overview') and lists the covered items. Every word adds value, and there is no extraneous content.

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 system info tool with no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It specifies the scope of the overview and the required permission. It does not need to document return values in detail since the listed items imply the expected data.

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, and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds no misleading information. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'system overview', and enumerates the specific data points covered (OS, CPU, memory, disk, uptime). This differentiates it from sibling tools that focus on narrower areas like disk_usage or memory_usage.

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 use for a broad system overview but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over more specialized sibling tools or when not to use it. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the usage context implicit.

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