kit_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. The verb 'Get' clearly signals a read-only operation with no side effects, which is sufficient for a simple info tool. It doesn't mention auth or rate limits, but the tool's simplicity and the nature of the information (version, tools, status) make these less critical.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff or redundancy. It immediately states the action and the three specific pieces of information, making it easy to parse and understand in one pass.

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?

For a zero-parameter info tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what information is available (version, tools, update status) without needing to explain return values, since the output schema covers that. The context is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke this 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly avoids describing any parameters, and no additional semantics are needed. The schema already covers everything with an empty object.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with the resource 'GenTech Agent Kit' and specifies the exact information returned: version, available tools, and update status. This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, none of which are about the kit itself.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool: whenever the agent needs kit version, available tools, or update status. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but with zero parameters and a unique purpose, the usage is straightforward and unambiguous.

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