get_buffer_status

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

Explicitly states 'BEHAVIOR: pure read of buffer metadata. No side effects.' With no annotations provided, this fully discloses the read-only nature and lack of side effects.

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?

Exceptionally concise yet comprehensive. Front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by structured sections for return values, usage guidelines, and behavior. 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?

Given zero parameters and an existing output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, behavior, and return values. Provides complete context for the agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

No parameters exist in the schema, so baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics but confirms the tool takes no arguments.

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 'Report' and the resource 'rolling capture buffer's size, age range, retention policy, and disk usage'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_recent and search_history by indicating they are for contents.

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?

Provides explicit 'USE WHEN' for troubleshooting and before requesting historical context, and 'NOT FOR' for contents of the buffer with specific alternative tool names.

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