get-active-hosts-count

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It indicates a read-only, non-destructive operation but does not disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, data freshness, or what 'active and up' technically means. The parameter 'from' is mentioned only via schema.

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 sentences: a clear purpose statement followed by concise usage examples. It is front-loaded, has no redundant words, and every sentence adds value.

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 low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description gives basic purpose and usage context. However, it lacks explanation of what 'active and up' means, how the count is scoped (e.g., time range, workspace), and whether the result is real-time or historical. This leaves some ambiguity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (the single 'from' parameter is described in the schema). The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('total number of active and up hosts'), and includes example queries like 'how many hosts are running' that clarify its purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get-hosts' (which likely returns host details) by focusing on a count, but does not explicitly differentiate from 'list_host_totals'.

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 example usage phrases but gives no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., 'get-hosts' or 'list_host_totals'), nor does it mention prerequisites or limitations. The examples imply use cases, but not explicit directives.

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