cve_database_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return fields, update frequency (multiple times daily), data sources, and that no API key is required. It also mentions potential errors (CVEClientError). Rate limits are not mentioned, but the information provided is substantial.

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 well-structured with clear sections: main purpose, what it provides, use cases, return details, notes, and raises. Every sentence adds value, and it is appropriately sized without redundancy.

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 the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists (as indicated by context signals), the description fully covers the return fields and provides additional useful context (update frequency, sources, no API key needed). It is complete for an agent to understand and use the tool.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter information since there are none. It correctly provides context about what the tool returns instead.

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 gets information about the CVE database status and last update time. It lists exactly what it provides (last update timestamp, total CVE count, etc.) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like cve_search_by_id which search for specific CVEs.

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 includes a 'Common Use Cases' section that implicitly guides when to use the tool (verify data freshness, check database health, etc.), but it does not explicitly say when not to use it or mention alternatives. The context is clear.

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