hosting_showMaintenanceStatusV1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states it 'shows' status, implying a read operation with no side effects, but does not explicitly confirm safety, response format, or error cases. This is adequate for a simple query but not fully transparent.

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 sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and follows with a necessary instruction. 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no output schema, two parameters), the description covers the core purpose and required identifier. However, it omits return value format and any prerequisite conditions, leaving minor gaps. Adequate but not robust.

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 coverage is 100% and the description adds value for the 'software' parameter by explaining how to obtain the identifier. However, the 'username' parameter remains vague ('username parameter') and is not clarified in the description. The baseline is 3 due to high coverage, and the description provides marginal improvement.

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 it shows the maintenance mode status for a specific WordPress installation. It includes the verb 'show' and the resource 'maintenance mode status', distinguishing it from many sibling tools like 'hosting_toggleMaintenanceModeV1'.

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 explains how to obtain the required software identifier but does not compare to alternatives or specify when to use this tool versus other status tools. It implies usage for checking status, but lacks explicit guidance.

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