server_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. 'Return' strongly implies a side-effect-free read, and it names the two state areas covered (server health, Spotify connection), but it does not state auth requirements, whether the call can fail, or whether a disconnected Spotify state is surfaced as data vs. an error.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, restatement of the name, or redundant qualifiers. Every word contributes to identifying the returned state.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be enumerated, and the description correctly focuses on what is covered. It is nearly complete for a zero-param read tool, with only the failure/disconnected-state behavior left implicit.

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 of 4 applies; there is no parameter syntax for the description to clarify or for the schema to omit.

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 pairs a specific verb ('Return') with a specific resource ('basic server health and Spotify connection state'), so an agent knows exactly what it retrieves. There are no sibling tools to differentiate from, which is the only reason this is not a 5.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'server health' signals a diagnostic/health-check call, but the description never says when to invoke it or what condition it addresses. With no siblings and no parameters, no alternatives or exclusions are needed, so the implied context is adequate.

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