KBK Live Alert (time-critical)

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses a key behavioral rule for the agent (when proactive reminders are justified) and describes the output fields. It lacks explicit statement about side effects, but as a read-only status check, the critical behavioral expectations are covered.

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 two sentences that front-load the time-critical purpose and then give a crisp imperative rule. Every word earns its place; no fluff or repetition.

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 params, no output schema), the description is fully complete: it explains what the tool returns inline, defines the behavioral trigger conditions, and sets the pull-only default. This is everything an agent needs to decide when to call it.

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, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds value by enumerating the return fields in place of parameter docs, helping the agent understand what the tool returns, which is especially useful without an output schema.

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's purpose: checking if a KBK live stream is on air now or imminent, with a specific verb 'check' and resource 'live stream'. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like get_twitch_status and get_schedule by emphasizing the time-critical 'tune in now' nature.

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?

Explicitly specifies when to use the tool vs. pull-only behavior: it is the ONLY tool that can justify a proactive reminder, and only under precise conditions (live===true or minutesUntilNextEvent <= 60). It also states the alternative (treat KBK as pull-only otherwise), making the decision boundary unambiguous.

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