status

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

The description discloses that the tool returns readiness, counts, and warnings, which indicates a read-only operation. However, with no annotations, it lacks details on potential side effects, error conditions, or data freshness.

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 a single, clear sentence that front-loads the essential information. Every word adds value, and there is no extraneous text. It is appropriately concise.

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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no annotations), the description adequately covers its purpose and output categories. It could mention potential error states or response format, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to understand basic behavior.

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 covers all inputs (none). The description adds no parameter information, but for 0-parameter tools, the baseline is 4. No additional semantics are needed.

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 returns bank readiness, counts, and ingestion warnings. It uses specific nouns ('bank readiness', 'counts', 'ingestion warnings') and contrasts with sibling tools that likely perform different functions like searching or dossier management.

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 implies usage when needing system status information, but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools like search or dossier. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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