Slskd Status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Check' implies a read-only operation and the return summary clarifies the output, but it does not state permission requirements, rate limits, or explicitly confirm that no state is modified.

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 front-loaded with a clear purpose, but the lengthy enumeration of return fields is redundant because an output schema already exists. It remains readable but could be trimmed without losing necessary information.

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 an output schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly. The main gap is the absence of explicit usage guidance relative to sibling tools, though the diagnostic purpose is obvious.

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 there are no parameter semantics to document. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the empty schema is consistent with the description.

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 (Check) and resource (slskd connection to Soulseek, connected peers, and transfer stats). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools such as slskd_search, slskd_download, and slskd_get_transfers.

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 purpose implies a diagnostic/status use case, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No alternatives are named, so usage must be inferred from the tool name and purpose.

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