get_platform_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It only states that it returns aggregated counts, without disclosing behavior such as whether it is read-only, performance implications, or what 'state' categories are included. This is a significant gap for a monitoring 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 a single, well-formed sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It conveys the essential information without any wasted words.

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?

For a zero-parameter statistic tool with no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete: it states what the tool does and what data it returns. Minor missing details like the exact list of states are not critical for invocation.

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 tool has zero parameters, which sets a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter-related details (none exist), but it does clarify that the returned data is a breakdown by state, which gives meaningful context to the output.

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 identifies the resource ('platform-level statistics') and the specific action ('Get'), and it states exactly what is returned (host and service counts by state). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that target individual hosts, services, or specific entities.

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 usage for platform-level overviews versus per-host or per-service tools, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool (e.g., 'use for high-level monitoring') or contrast it with alternatives. The context is clear but lacks explicit guidance.

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