fahali_get_engine_status

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It states the tool is public and returns specific fields, but does not mention mutation, authorization details, rate limits, or side effects. Adequate for a read-only tool but lacks depth.

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-loaded with the primary action, followed by specific output details. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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?

No output schema exists, so description must cover return values. It does so thoroughly (status, time windows, interpretation, context, inventory). For a no-parameter tool, this is nearly complete. Minor gap: no mention of pagination or result size limits.

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?

Zero parameters; schema coverage is 100%. Description adds value by detailing the return structure (per-engine fields, market context, unmapped alerts), which goes beyond the empty schema. Baseline 4 for 0 params is appropriate with additional context.

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 it gets liveness report for all detection engines, enumerating returned fields (last fired timestamp, event counts, status, interpretation, market context, unmapped alert types). Verb 'get' + resource 'engine status' is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like fahali_get_contagion_map or search_memories.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The note 'Public data — no tier required' implies ease of access but no comparison to alternatives or exclusions. Usage is implied from purpose but could be stronger.

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