datacore_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states the information returned (note counts, module health, update info), which is helpful, but it does not explicitly confirm that the operation is read-only or mention any potential side effects, latency, or authentication requirements.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the tool's purpose without any redundant information. Every word contributes to understanding what the tool does.

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 simple, zero-parameter status tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the key aspects: it states the resource (Datacore) and the specific status categories (note counts, module health, update info). While it could mention whether the status is real-time or cached, this is a minor gap and the description is sufficiently complete for its 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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty, so schema description coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to elaborate on parameter semantics, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 uses the specific verb 'Show' and resource 'Datacore status', explicitly listing what users can expect: note counts, module health, and update info. This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like datacore_capture, datacore_search, datacore_ingest, and datacore_date, which perform different operations.

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 this tool is used for checking overall Datacore system health, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. With no competing status tools among siblings, the context is clear but the guidance is not explicit.

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