get_system_status

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

With no annotations and no description of behavior, the agent is left entirely in the dark about whether this tool is read-only, has side effects, or requires permissions. The description fails to disclose any behavioral traits.

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 extremely short (only one phrase), which is concise but severely under-specified. It does not earn its place as a helpful description; it is merely a label.

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 no output schema and the presence of many sibling status tools, the description should explain what system status entails, what the return format is, and how it differs. It does none of this, leaving the tool contextually incomplete.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no value beyond the schema, but does not make things worse.

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?

Description 'ASTRA System Status' is essentially a tautology of the tool name 'get_system_status'. It does not specify what the tool does actively, only restates the name without adding a verb or distinct resource.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like 'get_platform_status', 'np_status', or 'sensor_status', which all likely provide status information. The agent receives no context for selection.

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