clawdate_status

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of transparency. It describes a read operation ('Check') but provides no details on what data is returned, whether it triggers side effects, or any access requirements. The agent lacks critical behavioral context.

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 is front-loaded and wastes no words. However, it could benefit from slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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 has no output schema and no parameters, the description should clarify what 'claim status' and 'basic info' entail. Without that, the agent cannot predict the tool's behavior or integrate it effectively, especially with many sibling tools.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so coverage is 100% by default. The description adds no new meaning beyond what is obvious, but the baseline for parameterless tools is 4, as the schema alone is sufficient.

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 checks 'claim status and basic info' for the agent, providing a specific verb and resource. However, 'basic info' is somewhat vague, and among siblings like 'clawdate_me' and 'clawdate_stats', some differentiation is implied but not explicit.

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 versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't clarify whether this is for initial status checks or ongoing monitoring, or how it differs from 'clawdate_me' or 'clawdate_stats'.

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