deeptutor_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description is consistent with the safe, non-destructive nature of the operation. It adds minimal context beyond the annotations by specifying that it checks the 'configured' backend and API availability, but it does not describe error behavior or what 'availability' entails.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the full purpose without redundant words or filler. It is appropriately minimal for a simple status-check tool.

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 zero-parameter input schema, the presence of an output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description is complete. An agent has enough information to select and invoke this tool correctly without additional context.

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 there is nothing the description needs to explain about parameters. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter documentation is required.

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 states a specific verb ('Check') and a clear resource ('configured DeepTutor backend and API availability'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools, which operate on sessions, messages, or content rather than reporting overall backend health.

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 the tool is used to verify backend readiness before or during DeepTutor operations, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or mention any alternative tools. The usage context is inferred from the purpose rather than stated directly.

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