status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must stand alone. It correctly indicates a read-only operation ('show') and states the return type, but does not disclose any side effects, rate limits, or whether configuration implies mutable state. Adequate for a read-only tool.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences, front-loading the purpose and briefly summarizing the return value. No redundant information.

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 there are no parameters, the description provides sufficient context for a simple status read tool. The presence of an output schema likely details the JSON structure, so repeating it is unnecessary. One minor gap: it does not explain what 'memory count' or 'configuration' represent.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered. The description does not need to add parameter meaning but adds value by describing the return format ('JSON with memory count and configuration').

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 'Show memory system status', which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'stats' (likely focuses on statistics) and 'health' (likely checks system health).

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'stats' or 'health'. However, given there are zero parameters and the purpose is clear, usage context is implied as a simple status read.

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