np_status

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

With no annotations, the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, what it returns, or any side effects. The minimal text does not compensate for the lack of annotations.

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 (7 words), which is concise but not well-structured. It is a fragment that could be expanded with key information without losing conciseness.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description should clarify what status information is provided. It fails to explain the output or distinguish from similar sibling tools, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 schema coverage is 100% by default. According to guidelines, baseline is 4. The description adds context by mentioning 'Platform & Controller Status,' which hints at the nature of the output, earning the baseline score.

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 'NeuroPlatform v2 — Platform & Controller Status' lacks a verb and does not state what action the tool performs. It vaguely indicates a status check but is more of a title than a clear purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to, or how it contrasts with siblings like get_platform_status. The description provides no usage context.

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