dialectic_mine_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It mentions what data is returned (config, buffers, passes) but does not explicitly state side effects, read-only nature, or permissions. The implication is read-only, but it's not stated.

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 very short (one sentence) but lacks a verb and reads as a list. It is concise but could be more informative and structured with a verb phrase like 'Retrieves miner status including...'.

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 that an output schema exists (true) and no parameters, the description is reasonably complete by listing the three key output components. However, it could be more explicit about the tool's action.

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 has no parameters (coverage 100%), so baseline is 4. Description adds value by specifying what the output includes (config, buffer sizes, last 5 passes), which is helpful beyond the 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 'Miner config + buffer sizes + last 5 capture passes' is a noun phrase listing return elements, not a clear verb-action. It does not explicitly state what the tool does (e.g., retrieve status), leaving ambiguity about its purpose.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like dialectic_mine_run or other dialectic tools. The description lacks context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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