service_status

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses it's a read operation (reads public GET /status), requires no auth, and has no allowance cost. Does not mention rate limits or other edge cases, but safety and security profile is clear.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then distinguishing sibling tool. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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?

No parameters, no output schema, but description is fully sufficient: explains scope (service vs account), behavior (read public endpoint), and invocation requirements (no auth). Agent has all needed information.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters (100% coverage). Description adds context that it reads a public endpoint without auth, which is valuable beyond the schema. No parameter descriptions needed.

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?

Clearly states it reports on the service (availability, capabilities, operator, deployment) and explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'status' for account status. Verb+resource+scope is very specific.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use (service status) and when not to (for account status, use 'status'). Also mentions it's a public read endpoint with no auth or allowance required, guiding invocation.

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