sigmodx_get_reliability

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'Get' and lists possible return values, which adds behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state side-effect freedom or prerequisites.

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 of 11 words, front-loading the action and result. No redundant or filler content.

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?

Simple tool with 1 parameter and no output schema; description specifies the output states. Minor gap: doesn't explicitly state the return type (string) or error conditions, but overall sufficient for the simplicity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description merely references 'a specific scenario' without elaborating on the enum values or their meaning. Fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'current reliability state' with explicit possible values (ALLOW/LIMIT/BLOCK) and scope (for an agent in a specific scenario). Distinguishes well from sibling tools which handle logging, hashing, and verification.

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?

Implies usage when needing reliability state, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., logging tools might also be contextually relevant). No when-not or exclusion mentioned.

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