Fluent Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context about checking live connection and version state, which goes slightly beyond the annotations by specifying what status means. It is concise but behaviorally transparent for a simple read-only operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that says exactly what the tool does and its side-effect profile. Zero filler, perfectly sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters, strong annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), and an output schema, the description is complete. It adequately conveys purpose and safety without needing to explain return values or additional behaviors.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema confirms this with 100% coverage. Baseline for zero parameters is 4; the description has no need to explain parameters and correctly stays silent.

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 a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('connection and version state'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling Fluent and mechanical tools. It also reinforces the read-only nature, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 context is clear: use this to check Fluent's connection and version before other operations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but for a status tool the intended usage is obvious and the 'without modifying Fluent' phrase helps set expectations.

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