hermes_check

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

The description honestly states the tool is not implemented, providing full transparency about its behavioral trait of being a stub. With no annotations, this is sufficient disclosure.

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 extremely brief, stating only the essential fact (not implemented) and the reason (API parity). Every word serves a purpose with no filler.

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 stub tool, the description adequately communicates its non-functional status. However, it lacks information about expected behavior if implemented, which limits completeness for a tool that appears in a tool list.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the 'job_id' parameter beyond what the schema already shows. The description does not explain its purpose or constraints.

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 explicitly states it is 'Not implemented' and kept for API parity, which clarifies it has no actual functionality. However, the name 'hermes_check' suggests a checking operation, creating a mismatch between expectation and reality.

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 usage guidance provided. The description does not advise when to use or avoid this tool, nor does it mention alternatives among siblings like hermes_ask or hermes_cancel.

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