freshness-status

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'cross-reference' but doesn't disclose what data is accessed, potential side effects, or staleness criteria. For a read-only query tool, more detail on behavior is needed.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded with the primary action. However, it lacks structure like separate usage or behavior sections, but remains efficient.

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 query tool with two optional params and no output schema, the description covers core purpose. However, it lacks details on staleness criteria, prerequisites, or return format, leaving some gaps.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds meaningful context beyond schema: 'failingOnly' limits to warn/error, and 'extractFields' explains the project pattern including wildcard and backtick usage.

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 answers 'is anything stale right now?' by cross-referencing dbt source freshness, but it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like dbt-sla-status or dbt-list-sources.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., dbt-sla-status, dbt-list-sources). The implication is for staleness checks, but no when-not-to or context provided.

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