spoolman_get_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool is a read operation ('Get') and specifies what information is returned, which is basic transparency. However, it does not explicitly address safety (e.g., whether it is non-destructive), authentication requirements, or side effects, though 'Get' implies read-only.

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 main action and resource, followed by specific details in parentheses. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers the purpose and return content by listing the information fields. It could be more explicit about response format or potential errors, but for a low-complexity info endpoint this is sufficiently 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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100% (empty schema), so there is nothing to document. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter details.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('general Spoolman API information'), and lists specific data points (version, database type, debug mode, paths). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on vendors, filaments, spools, or settings.

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 this is a utility for retrieving API-level details, which is appropriate when the agent needs system information rather than entity data. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over other tools or mention any alternatives or exclusions.

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