meineba_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds that the response covers session longevity and per-service offerings, which is mild supplementary context, but it does not state whether authentication is required to read login status or whether results are cached/stale.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, covering the three main content areas. The phrase 'what each one offers' is somewhat vague but does not waste space.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not describe return values, and it correctly summarises what the response contains. For a zero-parameter read-only tool this is nearly sufficient; only the ambiguity about whose session is being reported (current user vs. all services) leaves a small gap.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. Schema description coverage is 100% and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate at the parameter level.

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 names the resource (Meine BA services login/session status) and enumerates three outputs: which services are logged in, session duration, and offered capabilities. However, it has no explicit verb and no differentiation from session-related siblings like meineba_login_start, meineba_login_finish, and meineba_logout, leaving the agent to infer whether this reads existing state or performs a login action.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The agent is not told, for example, whether this should be called before or after meineba_login_finish, nor whether it supersedes meineba_termine or meineba_verlauf for session-related queries.

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