herdr_agent_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully lists the returned fields (agent_status, terminal_title, interactive_ready) and notes the nested location of agent_status, adding value. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe side effects, though the 'get' verb strongly implies safety.

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 two sentences long, with the main purpose in the first sentence and supplementary details in the second. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, making it highly concise and 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?

For a simple one-parameter getter without an output schema, the description adequately explains the return payload and the nesting of agent_status. It could optionally mention error scenarios, but the essential information is present for an agent to decide whether to invoke this 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?

The input schema already fully describes the 'target' parameter with 100% coverage, including the same valid target types. The description merely repeats this information without adding new semantic context, matching the baseline for schema-covered 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 the tool's function with the verb 'Get' and resource 'agent info', and specifies the target types (pane id, session id, path). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like herdr_agent_start, herdr_agent_prompt, and herdr_agent_wait by focusing on retrieving current state rather than initiating actions.

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 usage for checking agent status, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as herdr_agent_wait or herdr_agent_read. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, so the guidance relies on inference from the name and description.

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