connection_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. 'Whether... is currently connected' implies a read-only status check with no side effects, but it does not explicitly say the return format (e.g., boolean) or confirm no mutation. This is adequate for a simple status probe but leaves room for ambiguity.

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?

A single, well-formed sentence that directly states the essence of the tool. No fluff or redundant inormation. It is front-loaded with the subject 'Angel overlay' and the key state 'connected'.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description should clarify what the agent will receive. 'Whether...' suggests a boolean but is not explicit. The tool is simple enough that this may be sufficient, but the lack of usage context and return-type clarification leaves minor 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain. The schema coverage is trivially 100%, and the baseline for 0-param tools is 4. No additional parameter information is needed.

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 resource ('Angel overlay') and the property being checked ('currently connected to this server'). It clearly differentiates from the sibling tools, which are about features. However, it lacks an explicit action verb like 'Check' or 'Returns', so it reads as a state declaration rather than a command.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of sibling tools or conditions under which connection status would be relevant. The description only states what it reports, not why or when to call it.

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