Verifies whether the RobotStudio ClaudeBridge Add-In is running and connected so you can confirm bridge availability before issuing commands.
Check if RobotStudio ClaudeBridge Add-In is running and connected
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States it checks connectivity but does not disclose what happens if the add-in is not reachable (e.g., error behavior), response format, or side effects. Adequate for a simple ping, but lacks depth.
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?
Single sentence, no unnecessary words. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.
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 ping tool with no parameters or output schema, the description is mostly complete. Could be enhanced by specifying return type (e.g., boolean) or typical usage, but current version is sufficient.
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?
Tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for zero params is 4. Description is clear and does not need to add param details.
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?
Description clearly states the tool checks if the RobotStudio ClaudeBridge Add-In is running and connected. Uses specific verb 'Check' and explicitly names the resource, distinguishing it from all sibling tools which cover different operations.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention typical usage context (e.g., as a prerequisite check) or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.