broker_status

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Show connection status' which implies a read-only operation but provides no details on return format, required authentication, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior beyond the surface-level action.

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 sentence, completely free of redundancy. It states the purpose efficiently without wasted words, making it easy to parse.

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's simplicity (zero parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description adequately conveys the essential purpose. It could benefit from indicating what kind of statuses are returned, but for a status-check tool, 'connection status' is reasonably self-explanatory.

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?

Since the tool has zero parameters, the schema is empty. The description adds meaning by clarifying the scope ('for all brokers'), which is relevant to the absence of parameters. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate for tools with no parameters.

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 'Show connection status for all brokers' with a specific verb 'Show' and a specific resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like broker_connect and broker_disconnect, which are about establishing and terminating connections.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusion conditions. It simply states what the tool does without helping the agent decide between this and the connection management tools.

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