Show what API data is loaded

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 implies a read-only operation via 'Report' and 'confirm,' but does not explicitly state safety or side effects. It does add details about sync times and size, which is useful context beyond a simple 'report.'

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, front-loaded with the key output aspects and a usage tip. No wasted words.

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 is simple with no params and no output schema. The description covers what the tool reports (API index, UI source, game data sets, sync times, size) and when to use it. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description explains what the tool reports, but since there are no params, there is no parameter syntax to clarify. It adds context but does not further explain parameter semantics beyond 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 clearly states the tool reports which API index, UI source, and game data sets the server has, along with sync times and size. This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes from siblings like wow_data_status by focusing on sync status and size.

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 sentence 'Use this to confirm the data is present and current before relying on other tools' provides clear context for when to use it. There are no explicit alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for a 0-param status tool.

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