novada_setup

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by stating 'No auth required: This tool works even when NOVADA_API_KEY is not set,' which is critical behavioral insight. It also details the output (env var status, setup commands, active tools). Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior, and the description reinforces and contextualizes that.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and structured with bullet-style points. Every sentence adds value: purpose, use cases, output details, and auth requirements.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description thoroughly explains the output (status of env vars, setup commands, active tools). For a simple diagnostic tool, this is complete and leaves no ambiguity about what the tool returns.

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 schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by explaining what the tool does and what it outputs, compensating for the lack of parameters. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool with clear purpose.

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 explicitly states the tool checks environment configuration and provides step-by-step setup instructions. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools, which focus on account summaries, browsing, scraping, etc., by positioning itself as the first-time setup and diagnostic tool.

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 description specifies 'Use for: First-time setup, diagnosing missing credentials, getting exact config snippets' and notes it is safe to call before API key is configured. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use it, the use cases are clear. No direct alternative tool is mentioned, but the sibling list implies this is the only setup-oriented tool.

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