Context status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Report' implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't disclose how pressure is computed, whether server estimates are used by default, or that estTokensUsed overrides the estimate. Minimal behavioral detail.

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, focused sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's output and recommendation levels. No wasted words.

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 description is too sparse for a status tool with no output schema and no annotations. It doesn't explain what 'context pressure' means, how the recommendation is derived, or what the parameters do if omitted. The optionality of parameters is not mentioned.

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?

Schema coverage is only 33% (only estTokensUsed has a description), and the tool description adds no parameter semantics. It doesn't explain sessionId or tokenBudget, and fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 context pressure and a compaction recommendation, with the exact recommendation values. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform actions like compaction, trimming, or clearing.

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 alternative guidance is provided. The purpose implies it's a pre-compaction check, but the description doesn't state when to invoke it versus sibling tools or mention any prerequisites.

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