get_cad_bundle_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a meaningful non-side-effect trait: inspection occurs without downloading or starting the sidecar. It does not mention permissions, caching, or other operational details.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently states the core action and the key non-side-effect constraint.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema, so return values need not be described in detail. The description is nearly complete for a simple inspection tool, though it could better distinguish itself from closely related sibling tools.

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 there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and nothing in the description undermines that.

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 uses a specific verb ("Inspect") and resource ("optional pinned CAD sidecar") and clarifies it does not download or start the sidecar. This distinguishes it from preparation or execution siblings, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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?

The phrase "without downloading or starting it" implies a read-only status check, which gives useful contextual guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over siblings like get_runtime_status or prepare_cad_bundle_workspace.

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