Get EFT server status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses freshness ('Always fetched fresh, not cached') and live status, but does not mention return format, rate limits, or any side effects. For a no-parameter read-only tool, this is acceptable but not rich; a description of what the response contains would be better.

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, front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by a key behavioral note. No wasted words; 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?

For a simple no-parameter, no-output-schema status check, the description tells the agent what the tool does and that it is fresh. It could add a hint about the response structure (e.g., per-component status), but it is not essential for a correct call. Adequate for the complexity level.

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, so schema coverage is trivially 100% and there is nothing to explain. The description correctly implies no inputs are required, and no parameter documentation is needed.

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 ('Get'), a clear resource ('live status of Escape from Tarkov's servers'), and enumerates components (website, launcher, game servers). It is unambiguous and clearly distinct from sibling tools, which are all item/trader/map/task lookups.

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 when to use it ('current live status', 'Always fetched fresh') and the sibling tools are unrelated, so no explicit exclusions are needed. It provides clear context that this is a real-time check, though it does not explicitly name an alternative or a 'when not to use' scenario.

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