get_system_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the call is 'cheap', implying low cost. It does not mention side effects, auth needs, or rate limits, but for a simple read operation this is sufficient. No contradictions.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences totaling 13 words. The first sentence front-loads the key information, and the second adds the cost hint. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given zero parameters and an existing output schema, the description is fully complete. It covers what the tool does and its lightweight nature, leaving no gaps for an agent to misunderstand.

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?

There are zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds value by enumerating the content of the output (OS, kernel, etc.), which goes beyond the input schema's empty definition.

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 lists the specific information returned (OS, kernel, uptime, CPU/mem summary, load average). It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('system info'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_cpu_info or get_disk_usage by being a composite summary.

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 'One cheap call' implies efficient use for a quick overview. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, the context of a summary alongside many specific sibling tools provides implicit guidance.

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