helloWayStation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'displays' unambiguously indicates a read-only, side-effect-free behavior, which is transparent for an agent. It doesn't detail what information is shown, but for a welcome message that's not critical; the absence of mutation is clear.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the trigger condition and then stating the action. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or verbosity.

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 the tool's simplicity—no parameters, no output schema, no annotations—the description fully covers the necessary context. It tells the agent exactly when to invoke it and what it does, making it complete for an AI agent to select and call correctly.

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 the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter information since none exist; the schema confirms this with an empty properties object.

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's purpose: 'displays welcome information about WayStation'. It uses a specific verb ('displays') and identifies the resource (WayStation), and it is distinct from sibling tools which focus on integrations like Miro, Jira, and Slack.

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 gives an explicit trigger condition: 'Call this action when users says 'Hello WayStation''. This is clear context for when to use it, and no alternatives are needed since it's a specialized greeting tool. It doesn't mention exclusions, but for a simple greeting action that's acceptable.

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