status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering the safety and repeatability profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: 'Returns instantly even during indexing,' which highlights that the tool is fast and non-blocking. It does not detail the exact response format, but this is not critical given the annotations and simple nature.

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 front-loaded sentence: 'Check server readiness. Returns instantly even during indexing.' Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary detail or repetition. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema and strong annotations, the description is complete. It conveys the core purpose and one key behavioral trait that could influence invocation timing. An agent has enough information to select and invoke it correctly.

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 tool accepts no parameters, and the input schema is empty with 100% coverage. The description implicitly confirms that no arguments are needed, aligning with the baseline for zero-parameter tools. There is no additional parameter information 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 tool's function: 'Check server readiness' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like analyze or suppress, which serve different purposes. The added note 'Returns instantly even during indexing' further clarifies its scope.

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 that this tool is used to check server status, and the note about returning instantly during indexing suggests it can be used as a quick readiness probe. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention any exclusions, relying on the user to infer the use case.

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