get_setup_status

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

The description discloses what the tool returns (events, integrations, timelines, next steps) and implies a read-only operation. No annotations are present, so the description bears the full burden and handles it well without contradictions.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, first presenting the purpose and returns, second providing usage guidance. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return shape and usage. It could mention format or limits, but the summary is sufficient for an overview 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a description for the optional event_id parameter. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score applies.

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 returns the general account status, listing specific components (events, integrations, timelines, recommended steps). It distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on individual resources.

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 explicitly says to call it first before any other action ('Chame sempre primeiro antes de qualquer outra ação.'), which provides strong context for use. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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