hwp_status

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

Discloses the key behavioral trait 'Side-effect free: never launches Hangul'. However, it does not describe the return value format, though an output schema exists.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences, essential information only. No fluff.

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 status check tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidance, and side effects completely.

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 exist, and description adds no parameter info (baseline 4 per rubric). Schema coverage is 100% with empty schema.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Report whether the COM live-apply bridge is available' with specific context (Windows + Hangul). It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly referencing 'apply_to_open_hwp'.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Call this before apply_to_open_hwp' and 'Side-effect free: never launches Hangul', telling the agent when and why to use this tool.

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