testneo_get_local_agent_status

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses read-only nature and what is returned (registration status, heartbeat, setup_url). No behavioral traits are hidden.

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 sentences, no filler. First sentence immediately states purpose, second adds output details. Every word 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, parameterless, no-output-schema tool with no annotations, the description is fully complete. It explains what the tool does, what it returns, and its read-only nature.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable. Baseline 4 for 0 params.

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?

Description clearly states it 'Returns whether a TestNeo self-hosted agent is registered and recently heartbeating (local runner)', specifying verb and resource. It also mentions 'includes setup_url...', making the purpose distinct from siblings which focus on tests, projects, and executions.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies it's for checking agent status, but lacks 'when' or 'when not' statements typical of good usage guidelines.

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