Get Agent Status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, error conditions, or response format, which is insufficient for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 concise with a single, clear sentence. It's front-loaded and wastes no words, making it efficient for quick understanding, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a single parameter with full schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, output, and usage context, making it inadequate for the tool's complexity and the absence of structured support.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents the 'target' parameter. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, resulting in the baseline score of 3 for adequate but no extra value.

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 'Get status of agents' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('status of agents'), but it's vague about what 'status' entails and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_parallel_status'. It provides basic purpose but lacks specificity.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention sibling tools, prerequisites, or specific contexts for usage, leaving the agent without direction on tool selection.

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