get_setup_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Read-only' and clarifies that no arguments beyond the version header are needed, providing key safety and invocation details. It does not mention potential errors or prerequisites, but for a simple read-only getter this is sufficient.

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 two sentences long, with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. Every sentence adds practical value: what it does, that it's read-only, when to call it, and what parameters it takes.

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 simple read-only tool with an output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage context, parameter semantics, and safety. The output schema handles return values, so no further detail is needed. The guidance to call before setup actions completes the picture.

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 schema has a single required parameter 'server_version' with no description (0% coverage), but the description compensates by explaining that the only argument is the version header, giving the parameter semantic meaning. It does not specify the format or expected value, but the context makes it understandable.

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 'Get the workspace onboarding checklist with completed and pending steps,' combining a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling 'complete_setup_step' by focusing on retrieving status rather than modifying it.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call before suggesting or performing setup actions to avoid repeating completed steps, and points to 'complete_setup_step' as the alternative for marking steps done. This gives clear when-to-use guidance and differentiates from related tools.

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