get_system_status

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds that the tool is consumer-facing, requires no auth, and contains no secrets, giving additional context beyond annotations. It does not contradict annotations.

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 one sentence with a clear, front-loaded enumeration of return values. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or waste.

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 status tool with no parameters or output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns. It could mention potential error conditions or structure of the response, but it is complete enough for its simplicity.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info but lists the return values, which compensates for the lack of parameters. 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 tool returns consumer-facing platform health including version, signal-bot roster, tool count, and public marketplace listing count. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on other aspects like system health or account info.

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 states 'No auth, no secrets — safe to call anytime', indicating when to use this tool. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as for detailed health checks where get_system_health might be more appropriate.

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