granoflow_setup_detect_local_api

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions 'probe' implying network requests, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only or has side effects, or what the timeout implies. It leaves behavioral traits ambiguous.

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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, front-loaded with verb and object. Could briefly mention the two parameters but still efficient.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain the return value (e.g., boolean or connection info), nor how it integrates with the Granoflow setup workflow.

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?

Schema does not describe timeoutMs field, so description adds minimal meaning. The 'ports' parameter description adds context beyond schema ('defaults to known candidates'). Overall moderate enhancement.

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 states the action ('probe'), the resource ('bounded localhost port list'), and the purpose ('for a running Granoflow Local HTTP API'). It distinguishes from siblings like granoflow_health which likely serves a different purpose.

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 during setup to discover a local API but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like granoflow_health or granoflow_setup_status. No when-not or conditional guidance is provided.

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