Cycle connection status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool reports alive status and is stateless, which are key behavioral traits. It does not disclose error handling or response format, but for a simple health check, this is adequate.

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 two concise sentences with no waste. It front-loads the core purpose and uses minimal words, earning its place.

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?

The description covers purpose and statelessness but does not specify return values or error behavior. Given no output schema and the tool's simplicity, it is adequate but not complete. It could mention what kind of response the agent can expect.

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 is empty (0 params) with 100% coverage, so baseline is 4. However, the description mentions reminding about passing cycle data via tool args, which could be misleading since this tool has no args. This slightly detracts from clarity.

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 that the tool reports the coach is alive and reminds about statelessness. The verb 'reports' and 'reminds' are specific, and the description distinguishes the tool from data-heavy siblings by emphasizing it is a connectivity check and reminder.

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 provides clear context: use it to check if the coach is alive and to remind the agent about statelessness. It implicitly guides when to use this tool versus others (other cycle tools handle data). However, it lacks explicit when-not or alternatives.

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