status

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

Labels the tool as 'safe first call', strongly implying no destructive side effects. However, without annotations, the description could more explicitly state that it is read-only and does not modify state. The current description is adequate but not fully explicit.

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?

Two concise sentences. First sentence directly states the tool's output. Second sentence adds valuable usage context without bloat. Every sentence 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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains its purpose and when to use it, especially given the large number of sibling tools. It also provides a pointer to learn more about the overall workflow, making it 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?

Tool has 0 parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not detract from this.

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?

Clearly states that the tool returns the current graph state including nodes, links, health, and configuration. It distinguishes itself as a safe first call to check if memory holds anything, which differentiates it from sibling tools like 'reset' or 'prune'.

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?

Explicitly recommends using this tool as a safe first call to check memory state. Provides broader workflow context by mentioning the 2-step loop and directing new users to 'help' or 'skill(name=\'playbook\')' for more guidance, effectively telling when to use this tool and what alternatives exist.

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