recording_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Report' implies a read-only operation and it discloses the key status fields, but it does not explicitly state non-mutation, permissions, error behavior, or whether it works only during an active recording.

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?

It is a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose and packs useful return-field information without waste.

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 tool has an output schema and no parameters, so the description need not explain return values in detail. It adequately names the status contents, though it could clarify lifecycle context such as behavior when no recording is active.

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 takes zero parameters, so schema parameter semantics are not a concern. The description appropriately does not invent parameter details.

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 ('Report') and resource ('running recording') and enumerates the status fields returned. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as list_recordings or the lifecycle controls.

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 phrase 'running recording' implies the tool is for checking an active recording, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus list_recordings or other recording tools. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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