status

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

The description discloses the read-only nature and lists three specific items reported. With no annotations provided, this description carries the burden and adequately conveys the non-destructive behavior, though it lacks detail on potential error conditions.

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, focused sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose without unnecessary details.

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 read-only status tool with an output schema, the description covers the key elements without needing to detail return values. It is sufficiently complete for an agent, though it could mention that results depend on the workspace parameter.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter 'workspace' with a clear description. The tool description does not add additional semantic information beyond what the schema provides.

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 it 'reports hook install state, local envelope count, and Matrix Scroll config' with a read-only hint. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_envelopes which lists envelopes.

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 implies it is for checking status and notes it is read-only, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_envelopes or when not to use.

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