Get OrcaSlicer status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds context by enumerating the types of status data returned (dirty keys, slice validity, running state), but does not disclose further behavioral traits such as auth requirements or rate limits. This is sufficient but not extensive.

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, concise sentence that lists the key status categories. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no unnecessary words or redundant information.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only status tool with no output schema, the description gives a reasonable overview of the return content (app/project/preset status, dirty keys, slice validity, running state). However, it does not describe the return structure or provide any usage context, such as when a status might be stale or what 'dirty keys' means. Given its simplicity, it is mostly complete but leaves some nuances unexplained.

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, and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. With no parameters to describe, the description does not need to add parameter information. The baseline of 4 applies.

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 what the tool does: it retrieves status information about app/project/preset, dirty keys, slice validity, and whether a slice is running. This specific list distinguishes it from siblings like get_slice_status or get_job_status, which are more narrowly scoped.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like get_slice_status and get_job_status, the description does not clarify that this is the general status overview or when one would choose it over those.

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