get_pulse

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Get' implies a read operation and the returned metric categories are named, but the description does not say what 'refresh' does, whether it recomputes or clears anything, or what the response structure looks like.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the resource and scope in the first clause, enumerates the output categories, and adds one useful application sentence. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 conveys the tool's basic purpose and output categories, which is enough for basic selection, but because there is no output schema, refresh is undocumented, and no alternative tools are compared, the context is not fully fleshed out.

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 schema only documents date, and coverage is 50%, so the description should compensate for the undocumented refresh. The description adds some meaning around date ('today or a specific date') but says nothing about what refresh controls, how it behaves, or when to set it.

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 states a specific verb and resource: getting a wiki pulse for today or a specific date, and lists the included metrics. It does not explicitly contrast this with nearby siblings such as generate_daily_brief or run_wiki_health, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 explicitly recommends using this tool to provide daily situational awareness of the user's knowledge base. However, it gives no when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, so it stops short of full usage guidance.

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