Brain State

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

The readOnlyHint annotation indicates no side effects, and the description supports that by calling it a 'live pulse' and 'not a report'. It doesn't mention any side effects, so it's transparent. Credit for annotation.

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 slightly verbose with redundant metaphor ('neuron brain senses') but overall it's short and structured. It could be more concise but acceptable.

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?

It covers what the tool provides (phase, tool, recent calls, memory stats) and distinguishes it from a report. Given the lack of parameters and output schema, this is sufficient context.

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 no parameters, so the description doesn't need to explain any. Baseline for zero-param tools is 4, and the description doesn't conflict.

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 tool provides current state: phase, running tool, recent calls, and memory stats. The metaphorical language 'neuron brain senses' slightly obscures but the explanation 'live pulse' clarifies. Overall, purpose is distinct.

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 notes it's 'not a report' and gives a live view, which hints at usage. But it doesn't explicitly contrast with other status tools like dashboard_state or job_status. It lacks explicit when-to-use guidance.

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