telemetry

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

With only readOnlyHint=false available, the description carries the safety burden well: it discloses that telemetry is local and opt-in, that data never leaves the machine, that prompts are stored only as truncated hashes, and that destructive actions (enable/disable/clear) require explicit user authorization plus confirm=true. That is substantive behavioral context no annotation provides.

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?

Three tight sentences: identity and action set first, then the authorization precondition, then the privacy guarantees. Every clause earns its place and nothing is repeated.

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 zero-required-param settings tool with no output schema, the definition covers what the tool does, which actions mutate state, what authorization is needed, and the privacy model. Nothing an agent needs in order to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so action, top, and confirm are already fully documented, including the confirm/authorization rule which the description merely echoes. The description adds no syntax, defaults, or edge cases beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific resource (local, opt-in rule-selection telemetry) and enumerates the five sub-actions it performs, so an agent knows exactly what the tool manages. It does not, however, differentiate itself from nearby siblings like stats or status, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

It states a precondition for mutations ('require explicit user authorization and confirm=true'), which is real usage guidance, and 'defaults to status' is implied by the action enum. But it never says when to reach for this tool versus siblings such as stats or status, nor any when-not condition.

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