get_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get running status' without mentioning side effects, return format, or whether it's a read-only operation. The name implies read-only but this is 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 a single short phrase, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks any structural elements that would help an agent parse key information. The brevity is not an asset because it omits essential context.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is still incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'running status' means, what the return value contains, or how it differs from related tools like get_login_info. An agent would have to infer the purpose and output.

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 input schema has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. Per the baseline rule for zero parameters with high coverage, a 3 is appropriate, though the description contributes nothing 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 states a verb and resource ('Get running status'), so it's not a tautology, but it's vague about what entity's status and what fields are returned. It doesn't differentiate from siblings like get_login_info or get_version_info, which also fetch state, leaving ambiguity about the exact scope.

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 given on when to use this tool versus the many siblings that retrieve similar state (e.g., get_online_client, get_version_info). There is no context about prerequisites or typical invocation scenarios.

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