pillar_status

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior itself. 'Check' and 'get' imply a safe read operation, which is useful, but the description never says what happens when the user is not connected (error, null, empty address) or whether this tool has side effects, such as how it relates to pillar_connect.

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?

Two short sentences, with the core purpose stated up front. The trailing 'Tip' about earning_opportunities is tangential to this tool's job, but it is clearly marked as a tip and is not harmful.

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 status tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what is checked and what value comes back. The only real gap is the disconnected-state behavior, which matters here because the tool's whole job is to report connectivity.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline for this dimension is 4. The description correctly does not discuss parameter syntax and instead focuses on the output value (the wallet address).

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?

States a specific verb and resource: it checks Pillar connectivity and returns the user's wallet address. That is clear on its own, but among many sibling status/position tools (pillar_position, pillar_dca_status, pillar_direct_stacking_status, wallet_status, legion_status) it does not explain how it differs from them beyond the word 'connected'.

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 only guidance is a 'Tip' pointing at earning_opportunities, which is a next-step recommendation rather than a when-to-use rule for this tool. Nothing tells the agent whether to call this before pillar_connect, how it relates to pillar_disconnect, or what the agent should do if it isn't connected.

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