gold_setup_check

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently states that it is a check, only shows names of configured or missing API keys, never values, and outputs the next step. This reasonably implies a non-destructive diagnostic action, though it never explicitly states 'read-only' or 'no side effects'.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences deliver the purpose, the usage instruction, and the key output content with no filler. 'Run this FIRST' is placed immediately after the tool name, maximizing scannability.

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 zero-parameter setup diagnostic with no output schema, the description is complete: it tells the agent what to expect (license tier, API key status, next step), and no additional context is needed to invoke it correctly.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema already fully documents the invocation surface. The baseline of 4 applies; there are no parameter semantics left to clarify.

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 a specific verb-resource pairing ('SETUP CHECK for WooCommerce Gold') and clarifies exactly what it reports: license tier, API key presence, and next step. This clearly distinguishes it from the operation-focused sibling tools like gold_list_products or gold_create_product.

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 instruction 'run this FIRST' provides explicit timing guidance and implies it should precede business operations. It does not name when-not-to-use cases or alternatives, but no sibling setup tool exists, so the when-to-use condition is sufficient.

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