hb_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful context: it reports environment, base URL, key scopes, write enablement, toolsets, and rate limit. "Never reveals a key or token" is a useful safety disclosure beyond the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core question, followed by a precise list of reported fields. Every sentence earns its place, and the final "Call this first" instruction is clear and actionable.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining return values, and it does so thoroughly. For a parameterless diagnostic tool, it provides enough detail for an agent to understand what will be returned and 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 there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description appropriately avoids inventing inputs and focuses on behavior and returned information.

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 states a specific purpose: reporting caller identity and permissions via GET /auth/me. It distinguishes this diagnostic tool from the sibling operation, event, guide, and webhook tools by explaining exactly what status information it returns.

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?

"Call this first" gives explicit ordering guidance for using this tool before others. It does not discuss when not to use it, but for an identity/status tool with no parameters that scenario is less relevant.

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