get-import-export-status

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

With no annotations, the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it fetches status and capabilities, but does not mention it is read-only, any authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens on error. Minimal transparency.

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 of 8 words, front-loading the key information. No filler or redundant details. Highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Despite no parameters and low complexity, the description lacks detail about what 'status and capabilities' entails. Without an output schema, the agent has no idea what fields to expect, such as whether import/export is enabled, current jobs, limits, etc. Incomplete for a status 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?

There are no parameters (0 params, 100% schema coverage). The description adds nothing about parameters, but this is acceptable as no documentation is needed. A baseline score of 4 is appropriate given no parameter info 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'import/export system status and capabilities', making the purpose specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get-server-stats, get-policy-status, and get-rate-limit-status by focusing on import/export. However, 'capabilities' is slightly vague, reducing clarity.

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. There are no context cues, exclusions, or prerequisites mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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