team_status

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

Describes read-only data without side effects. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Lacks details on error conditions or access requirements.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loading output details then usage. No extraneous 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?

Covers what the tool does and when to use it. No output schema, but listed fields suffice. Could mention return format, but adequate for a simple status tool.

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 defined; schema coverage 100%. Description adds no param info (none needed), but explains fields shown. Baseline 4 for zero parameters.

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?

Description clearly states specific verb 'Show' and resource 'team sync health' with detailed fields (last sync time, uncommitted changes, conflict count, configured remote URL). Distinct from siblings like team_sync or team_init.

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 says to verify sync backend before or after team_sync call. Provides clear usage context, though no explicit when-not-to-use.

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