status

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

Explicitly declares 'No side effects' and read-only nature. Details the structure of the response, including fields like 'vision' and 'deps', with explanations of their meaning.

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?

Concise and front-loaded: first sentence gives the core purpose, followed by a succinct breakdown of the return value. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given zero parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description fully covers the tool's behavior, including what the output contains and that it has no side effects.

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?

No parameters exist (input schema has zero properties, 100% coverage), so the description does not need to add parameter explanations. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it returns combined server and sandbox status in a single read-only call. It is distinct from sibling tools like click, screenshot, etc., which are not status-related.

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 'run this first' and 'when filing bug reports', providing clear use cases. No alternative tools needed for status queries.

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