managed_agent_status

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds value by detailing the output fields (entries processed, etc.). It does not discuss edge cases like no runs yet, but overall adequately transparent beyond 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?

One sentence, 15 words, front-loaded with 'Show'. Every word is necessary and informative. No redundancy or 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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns (four categories of status data). Given the tool's simplicity and zero parameters, the description is complete and leaves no important gaps.

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 (0 params), baseline 4. The description does not need to add parameter info. Schema coverage is 100% for 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?

The description clearly states the tool shows status of the last managed lesson agent run, listing specific metrics (entries processed, lessons created, gates promoted, total runs). It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like run_managed_lesson_agent (which runs, not shows) and self_distill_status (different domain).

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it should be used after a managed lesson agent run, but does not mention exclusions or provide comparative context against siblings like run_managed_lesson_agent or self_distill_status.

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