brain_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation ('Check') but does not state whether it is safe, what it returns, or any side effects, which is insufficient for transparency.

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, short sentence with no superfluous content. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, though it could be criticized for under-specification, that is a content issue, not a structure issue.

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, it is relatively simple. However, the description does not explain what 'health and statistics' means or what the output schema contains, leaving significant ambiguity about the tool's behavior and return value.

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 schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). The description adds some context by indicating the tool is a health/statistics check, but since there are no parameters, the baseline is appropriately set to 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 uses the verb 'Check' and identifies the resource as 'Brain', which is a specific action. However, 'health and statistics' is vague and does not specify what aspects of health or which statistics are included, making it less precise than examples like 'List ALL calls in date range'.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools handle memory operations, but the description does not mention these or any exclusions, leaving the usage context implied at best.

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