check_crystal_staleness

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

No annotations provided; description merely states it 'checks how many crystals are stale,' implying a read operation but offering no details on side effects, resource consumption, or response format. Behavioral insight is minimal.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and without wasted words, but it sacrifices necessary detail (e.g., parameter explanation). It is concise but insufficiently informative.

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?

The description lacks essential information about the required parameter and does not clarify what the output schema provides. For a tool with one parameter and no schema descriptions, the description is incomplete to enable correct invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not mention the required 'cluster_slug' parameter at all. The agent receives no guidance on what values are valid or how the parameter affects the tool's behavior.

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 verb (check), resource (crystals), and condition (>10% delta since generation). It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_crystals' (list all) and 'read_crystal' (read specific), providing a specific monitoring function.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. The description implies usage for staleness checks but does not mention scenarios where other tools (e.g., list_crystals, read_crystal) would be more appropriate.

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