ai-count_pending

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

The description implies a read-only operation (getting a count) but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive. Without annotations, more explicit behavioral context would be beneficial, but the description is not misleading.

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 two sentences, highly concise, and front-loads the purpose. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 count tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It explains the purpose and a typical use case. No further details are necessary.

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 input schema covers 100% of the parameter (agent_type) with a description. The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score is appropriate.

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 it 'Gets the count of pending AI work items', using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ai-claim_work_item or ai-complete_work_item.

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 phrase 'Useful for checking if there's work available' provides clear guidance on when to use this tool. While it doesn't explicitly exclude other contexts, it conveys a primary use case effectively.

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