get_slo_report

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one meaningful behavioral trait: it is non-mutating ('without changing infrastructure'). However, it says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, freshness of the data, or what the report contains.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the resource and the key safety constraint with zero filler.

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 zero-param, read-only reporting tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essentials but leaves the shape of the 'report' and any scoping (all SLOs? which services?) unspecified.

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 takes zero parameters, so parameter semantics is inherently uncomplicated; the baseline for a 0-param tool is 4. The description adds nothing param-related, but there is nothing to add.

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?

States a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('current SLO checks and breaches'), which clearly separates it from siblings like get_fleet_status, list_recent_incidents, and get_cost_estimate. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling it is not, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

Gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and does not reference any alternative tool. The intended use (checking SLO status) must be inferred from the resource name alone.

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