freecad_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses what the tool reports (version, active document, object counts) and implies a read-only status check via the name and 'before anything else' phrasing. However, it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects or requires no permissions, leaving some ambiguity.

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 three concise sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the main action ('Check the bridge connection...') and each subsequent sentence adds critical usage and output details. Every word earns its place.

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 zero parameters and an output schema that likely details the return structure, the description is complete. It explains what the output means (version, active doc, object counts) and when to call it. No additional context is needed 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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is fully covered. The baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific information, but none is needed. It focuses on the tool's purpose and output, which is appropriate.

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 purpose: 'Check the bridge connection and list open documents.' It also specifies the exact information reported (FreeCAD version, active document, object counts), making it distinct from sibling tools like list_documents, which likely only list documents.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this before anything else.' This is clear context but does not provide when-not-to-use instructions or mention alternatives, which prevents a 5. It strongly implies this is the first step for any session.

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