Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• log_touch_grassA
  4.6/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Goes beyond annotations by detailing non-idempotency, error handling, side effects (append-only local file write, no network), and persistence. No contradiction with annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Well-structured with sections for action, side effects, and usage guidelines. Every sentence adds value, though could be slightly more compact without losing clarity.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Covers all essential aspects: what it does, side effects, error handling, usage context, and file mutation details. No output schema but return values are implied by history mutation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema covers the single optional parameter fully with description of its role as descriptive metadata. Tool description does not add extra parameter context beyond schema, which has 100% coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool logs a grass-touching session, increments total touches, and adjusts streak. It distinguishes itself from siblings like check_grass_conditions and get_stats by focusing on recording user action.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly states when to use (only after user confirms) and when not to use (never for testing, planning, or speculation). Provides clear context for appropriate invocation.

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

• check_grass_conditionsA
  4.9/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Discloses side effects: outbound HTTPS to ip-api.com and open-meteo.com, caching, latency 200-600ms, and that it never mutates streak fields. This adds value beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) which already indicate safe behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Description is concise, well-structured, and front-loaded. Every sentence provides value: main output, side effects, latency, usage guidance, and alternatives.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Although there is no output schema, the description details the return fields. Combined with annotations covering safety, the description is complete for a read-only tool with no parameters.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Input schema has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable since there are none. Baseline 4 for zero parameters.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool returns the user's outdoor context including city/region, weather, sunset, golden-hour, and streak. It uses specific verbs and lists resources, distinguishing itself from sibling get_stats which is for streak-only without network calls.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly provides when to use ('once per session before deciding whether to nudge the user outside') and when not to use ('don't poll repeatedly; conditions change on the order of minutes'). References alternative tool get_stats for streak-only data and mentions the SessionStart hook.

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

• get_statsA
  4.9/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Adds context beyond annotations: no network calls, no mutation, no auth required, and specifics about the file source and returned fields.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Concise three sentences with clear structure: purpose, return contents, and usage guidance. No wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns and when to use it, with sibling references for context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  No parameters exist; description adds no param info but correctly describes the return value, fulfilling the lack of schema parameters.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Clearly states it returns the raw contents of a specific file with listed fields, and distinguishes from sibling check_grass_conditions.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly provides 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, naming an alternative tool for different needs.

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

• suggest_activityA
  5/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=true), the description reveals internal side effects: it calls check_grass_conditions, triggering HTTPS calls and cache writes. It also notes determinism and potential repetition in quick succession.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is well-structured with front-loaded purpose, side effects, and usage rules. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's simplicity (no params, no output schema), the description fully covers inputs, behavior, side effects, and usage context, leaving no gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters5/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  No parameters exist, but the description explains the implicit inputs (weather, temperature, sunset) and the deterministic behavior, adding value beyond the empty schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool returns a single context-appropriate outdoor activity filtered by weather, temperature, and sunset time. It distinguishes from siblings like check_grass_conditions, get_stats, and log_touch_grass.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicit guidance is provided: when to use (after deciding to nudge) and when not to use (before deciding, or re-suggesting declined activities). This helps the agent decide correctly.

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