he_auth_status

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It clearly states this is a read-only check, listing what aspects are verified. Could mention that no tokens are modified, but overall transparent.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, no unnecessary words. Perfectly concise.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is quite complete. It could mention the return format, but the behavior is well-specified. Given complexity is low, this is sufficient.

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?

No parameters in schema (0 params, coverage 100%). Description adds value by detailing what auth status includes, going beyond the empty schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4; description enhances it.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Check' and resource 'current authentication status', with parenthetical listing specifics (logged in, token expiry, token source). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like he_refresh_token or he_set_tokens.

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?

Purpose implies usage before authenticated calls, but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives are mentioned. Siblings like he_refresh_token could be contrasted, but the description alone is clear enough for basic status checking.

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