tailscale_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It correctly indicates a read-only operation ('Get a summary') and lists output fields, but does not disclose prerequisites (e.g., auth level), rate limits, or any potential limitations. The behavioral aspects are partially covered.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys all essential information without any extraneous words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description adequately outlines the key return fields (counts, timestamps). However, it omits details like response format or additional metadata (e.g., tailnet name). For a zero-param tool with many siblings, this is mostly sufficient but not fully exhaustive.

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, and the description does not need to add meaning for parameters. Schema coverage is 100% (no params). Per the guidelines, baseline is 4 for 0 parameters.

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's function: 'Get a summary of the tailnet status' with specific elements (total device count, online/offline counts, last-seen timestamps). It uniquely distinguishes itself from siblings like tailscale_device_list or tailscale_tailnet_settings_get, which focus on resource-level details.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the unique purpose (summary vs. specific actions) implies usage for an overview, it lacks explicit context such as 'Use for high-level status, for per-device details use tailscale_device_list'.

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