krita_diffusion_status

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond these annotations by specifying that no plugin loading or backend connection occurs, which clarifies the operational side-effect profile and helps an agent avoid expecting setup actions.

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 sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by a compact exclusion that prevents misuse. Every sentence contributes necessary 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?

The description is adequate for a simple status-checking tool, but it omits any explanation of the output format or the role of instance_id. With no output schema, the meaning of 'integration availability' could be clearer, though the overall intent remains understandable.

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 only parameter, instance_id, has no description in the schema (0% coverage), and the tool description does not explain its role. While the name is somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema, leaving an agent to infer that instance_id identifies the Krita instance to check.

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 ('Discover') and resource ('already loaded Krita AI Diffusion plugin') and states the outcome ('report integration availability'). It clearly distinguishes itself from similar status tools by focusing specifically on the diffusion plugin, and the closing clause explicitly excludes loading or backend connection behaviors.

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 implies the tool is for checking an existing plugin state, not for initializing or connecting anything. The explicit 'Does not load plugins or connect to a backend' gives a clear when-not-to-use signal, though it could more directly name alternatives like krita_configure_diffusion or krita_status.

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