get_agent_status

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

Explicitly states 'Read-only', clearly indicating no side effects. Though no annotations are provided, the description covers the key behavioral trait. Further context (authentication, rate limits) is not critical for a read-only status tool.

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 concise sentences with front-loaded key information. Every word is meaningful; no redundancy.

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?

Describes the main data fields and behavior. With an output schema available, the agent can rely on that for detailed return structure. The description is sufficiently complete for a no-parameter tool.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description confirms the tool requires no input, adding no additional parameter meaning, which is appropriate.

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 retrieves the current runtime status of the fleet, listing specific data types (agents, hosts, states, metrics, deploy state). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'request_deploy' or 'remediate', which involve actions.

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 for monitoring fleet status but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when not to use it. Given its simplicity, the implied usage is adequate.

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