roamzy_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: it checks status and highlights a critical flag. The instruction to back off if purchases_paused is true adds actionable behavioral context beyond what an empty schema would provide.

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 sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides a critical usage rule. Every word earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter tool with no annotations, the description is nearly complete. It conveys the essential purpose and a vital behavioral rule. However, it does not describe the response structure beyond mentioning 'agent pause flags,' which could be helpful given the lack of an output schema. Still, it is sufficient for the agent to use the tool correctly.

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 schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-level detail (none needed), but it effectively explains the tool's purpose. Per guidelines, baseline for 0 params is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Check Roamzy API status, including agent pause flags.' It uses a specific verb ('Check') and identifies the resource ('status'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'roamzy_create_order' or 'roamzy_get_esim', which perform different operations.

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 provides usage context: 'Agents MUST call this before purchase attempts and back off if purchases_paused=true.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke the tool and what action to take based on the result, leaving no ambiguity.

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