get_capability_manifest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, or what 'trust boundaries' entail in a behavioral sense, leaving the agent without important safety and execution context.

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 clear sentence with no filler words, typical of a concise tool definition. However, it is terse to the point of omitting useful context, so not a 5.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description does not explain what the 'four-tool diagnostic surface' refers to, how it relates to sibling tools, or what 'trust boundaries' means in practice. The tool's purpose seems specialized, and the description provides insufficient contextual grounding for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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 has zero parameters, so the description cannot add parameter-level meaning. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not detract from this.

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 uses the specific verb 'Report' and names a concrete resource ('exact four-tool diagnostic surface and its trust boundaries'), distinguishing it from sibling tools. However, 'four-tool diagnostic surface' is somewhat cryptic without elaboration, preventing a 5.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description only states what the tool reports, not when it is appropriate to call it.

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