superpos_heartbeat

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavior. It mentions sending a heartbeat and optional status setting but does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, or consequences of not calling it. For a read-only-like operation, this is minimal but sufficient.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action ('Send a heartbeat'), no redundant information. Every word adds value.

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?

Tool is simple with one optional parameter and an output schema (details unknown). Description covers purpose and parameter sufficiently; it does not need to detail return values since output schema exists. Could optionally mention when not to use, but overall adequate.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining the 'status' parameter: optional and lists possible values (online, busy, idle, offline, error). However, these are not formalized as enums in the schema, slightly reducing clarity.

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?

Description clearly states the tool sends a heartbeat to show the agent online in the dashboard, with an optional status update. This is a specific verb-resource pair with no sibling tools covering the same action.

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 when to use (to indicate agent liveness) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. However, given the tool's simplicity and lack of sibling overlap, this is acceptable.

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