getSimulatorStatus

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly indicates the tool is a read-only snapshot ('session-level snapshot'), describes return fields, and notes the staleness rule—making the behavior transparent without contradictions.

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 quite long and dense, containing multiple clauses and details. While well-structured (stating returns, then usage guidance), it could be more concise—for example, the staleness explanation is verbose. Not every sentence earns 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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity and lack of output schema, the description thoroughly enumerates returned fields (phase, hardware-ready, roles, capability streams, testVideos, freshness advisory) and provides context on staleness. It is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool offers.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. While it does not explicitly document the sessionId parameter beyond its name, the description's context ('Read a live simulator session's current state') implies the parameter identifies the session, which is adequate for a single, simple string parameter.

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 it reads a live simulator session's current state, listing specific attributes (phase, hardware-ready, roles, capability streams, testVideos, freshness advisory). It distinguishes itself from sibling tool getEventLog in the DON'T USE section, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (during testing to confirm stream health, session health, app role attachment, staleness check, discover test videos) and when not to use (for event traces use getEventLog). Also provides context about staleness after code changes, giving actionable guidance.

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