sysknife_get_service_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description's 'Read-only' merely restates it. It adds no detail on what 'detailed status' contains (active state? PID? exit codes?) or whether it errors on unknown/ambiguous units, which is the real behavioral gap.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, with the required parameter flagged by the asterisk. The leading 'Read-only SysKnife action `GetServiceStatus`' restates the tool name and annotation and earns little.

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 read tool with no output schema this is close to adequate, but the schema/description mismatch (empty schema vs. a required 'unit' param mentioned only in prose) and the absence of any detail on the returned status fields leave an agent unsure what to pass and expect.

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 schema declares no properties, so the description's 'param: unit*' is genuinely additive — it reveals the required argument name that the schema omits. However, it does not say what form a unit takes (e.g., 'nginx.service' vs 'nginx') or whether a full name is required, leaving format semantics undocumented.

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+resource: 'show detailed status of a service'. An agent can distinguish this from sysknife_list_services (enumeration) reasonably well, though the description never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus sysknife_list_services, sysknife_get_service_logs, or sysknife_get_service_resource_limits. 'Read-only' implies a safe inspection call but provides no selection guidance or preconditions.

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