nest_status

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior on its own. It does reveal the read-only nature via 'Counts' and clarifies that it returns no content. However, it omits details about preconditions like what 'seeded' means, error behavior for unseeded databases, or any output format beyond the count categories.

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 sentence with a clear verb, a resource, and a clarifying qualifier ('Structure only; no content'). It is front-loaded and contains no redundant words, making it an example of efficient writing.

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 simple tool without an output schema, the description adequately summarizes the return categories. Yet it fails to explain the two input parameters, which are essential for invocation. This is a significant gap despite the tool's low complexity.

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 has 0% description coverage and the description never mentions app_id or db_path. The agent receives no guidance on what these parameters mean, how to populate them, or their effect on the results. The description is entirely focused on the output, leaving the required inputs unexplained.

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 action (Counts) and the resource (a seeded Nest DB) plus the specific dimensions counted (sources by status, fragments by type, topical categories by size). The phrase 'Structure only; no content' distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve content, making its scope unambiguous.

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 explicit when-to-use instructions or alternative tool names are given. The description implies its use for structural summaries ('Structure only; no content') but does not provide exclusions or comparisons with sibling tools like nest_scan or store_stats.

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