monica_status

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine value by disclosing what the call returns (identity, instance, contact count), which is the key behavioral fact for a diagnostic tool. No pagination or side-effect caveats are needed here.

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?

Two tight sentences with the purpose and returned fields front-loaded and the usage trigger last. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies the missing piece an agent needs — what a successful status response contains — and when to invoke it. Nothing material is absent for a tool of this complexity.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly does not invent parameter semantics and instead spends its words on return contents, which is the relevant 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?

States a specific verb (Check) and resource (connection to Monica), then enumerates exactly what it surfaces: the signed-in user, the instance, and the contact count. This clearly separates it from the data-retrieval siblings (monica_contacts, monica_notes, etc.), which fetch records rather than report connection state.

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?

"Useful when other tools fail" gives a concrete trigger condition for reaching for this diagnostic tool instead of the data tools. It stops short of an explicit when-not statement, but for a zero-param health check the intended usage window is unambiguous.

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