get_active_requests

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

No annotations present, so description bears full weight. Discloses it shows real-time progress and returns success/failure. No side effects mentioned, but for a read-only tool this is sufficient.

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?

Description is verbose with redundant bullet points and repeated phrases. While informative, it could be trimmed without losing clarity.

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 parameterless tool with output schema, the description covers purpose, usage triggers, and return format. No gaps given the low complexity.

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?

No parameters in schema, so description doesn't need to add parameter info. Schema coverage is 100% vacuously. Baseline 4 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?

Clearly states it retrieves currently active requests/operations in an Ambari cluster. Lists core functions and distinguishes from siblings like get_request_status by focusing on 'active' and 'in progress'.

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?

Provides extensive list of 'Required Usage Scenarios' covering various phrasings. Lacks explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use instructions, but the context is clear.

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