conduyt_zoom_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the operation is a GET (implying read-only), returns status values (connected | not_configured) and masked account and client IDs, explicitly states the client secret is never returned, and notes the required permission (settings:view). It does not explicitly label the operation as safe or idempotent, but the GET method implies it.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that packs key details (purpose, endpoint, return values, masking, permission) without any waste. Every part earns its place.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is nearly complete: it explains what the tool does, what it returns, and the permission required. It could be improved by explicitly stating that it is a read-only operation and when it should be used, but it covers the essential context.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema provides no parameter details. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. The baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it retrieves the Zoom connection status for the account via GET /api/v1/settings/zoom. It distinguishes itself from siblings like conduyt_zoom_connect and conduyt_zoom_test by focusing on status retrieval rather than connection setup or testing.

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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as conduyt_zoom_connect or conduyt_zoom_test. It only mentions the required permission, which is a prerequisite but not usage guidance.

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