remote_stream_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the returned fields ('enabled, error count, pending prompts') and the read-only nature via 'Get', but it does not mention error conditions, the default active session behavior, or any side effects, which would be helpful.

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 with a parenthetical detail, containing no fluff or redundancy. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and output.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema; the description lists the return fields, which is helpful. However, it lacks usage context (e.g., how this differs from remote_session_status) and does not define what 'enabled' or 'error count' refer to in the streaming context, so it is not fully complete.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage of the single parameter, including its optionality and default ('defaults to active session'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics 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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'streaming status for a session', with a parenthetical listing the key components (enabled, error count, pending prompts). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like remote_session_status and remote_stream_enable/disable.

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 provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as remote_session_status or remote_stream_enable/disable. The description implies usage by name and verb, but lacks explicit context or exclusions, so it falls short of the minimum guidance.

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