semgrep_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly describes the nature of the operation as reporting status information and lists the specific elements (binary, version, active ruleset, per-call limits). However, it does not explicitly state whether this call has any side effects, consumes scan quota, or requires authentication, though 'report' strongly implies a read-only operation.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no fluff. The primary purpose is stated first, followed by a succinct list of the reported items, and a clear usage instruction. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters), an output schema exists, and the description explains both what the tool reports and the exact situation in which to call it. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 input schema is empty. The baseline for parameterless tools is 4, and the description correctly does not need to document any parameters. It adds no parameter information because none exists.

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 reports whether deterministic analysis is available, with a specific verb ('Report') and a well-defined resource (Semgrep status/availability). It enumerates the exact information returned (binary, version, ruleset, per-call limits), making it easy to distinguish from the sibling scan tools semgrep_scan and semgrep_scan_diff.

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 explicitly says 'Call this once if a scan reports that it is unavailable,' providing a clear trigger condition. It implies this tool is for diagnostic status checks, not for performing scans, but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it beyond the trigger condition.

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