vote_status

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

No annotations provided, but description declares 'Read-only' and lists included data. Missing behavioral details like authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects.

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?

Front-loaded with main purpose, but the list of details makes it slightly wordy; still efficient overall.

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?

Provides a good overview of returned data for a read-only tool, though error conditions or prerequisites are not mentioned.

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?

Schema has one parameter 'name' with 0% description coverage; the tool description does not explain what 'name' refers to (presumably validator identity), so it adds no meaning 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 clearly states it shows 'voting health of a validator that a plain RPC check can't show' and enumerates specific details, but does not explicitly differentiate from the many sibling tools.

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?

Implied usage when plain RPC is insufficient, but no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives among the 15 sibling tools are provided.

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