relay_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description should fully cover behavioral traits. It lists the types of information returned (protocol version, encryption, etc.) but does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or explicitly confirm it is read-only. The lack of behavioral detail beyond the returned data is a moderate gap.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and uses a colon to introduce a list of returned categories. Every part is valuable, and there is no redundancy.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool, the description provides a good overview of the return content (protocol version, encryption, etc.). However, without an output schema, it could be more specific about the format or structure of the returned data. Still, it covers the main components adequately.

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, and the schema coverage is 100% trivial. The description adds value by detailing what information the tool returns, which is more than just repeating schema. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description meets that.

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 the tool retrieves information about the Voidly relay, listing specific categories like protocol version, encryption, features, federation status, and network stats. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like relay_peers (peer info) and agent_relay_stats (agent-specific relay stats).

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?

The description implies this is the general information tool for the Voidly relay, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., relay_peers or agent_relay_stats). No guidance on context or exclusions is provided.

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