get_data_freshness

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses the three key outputs: last data activation time, number of live segments, and status of the last run. The wording implies a read-only query, which is reasonable for a zero-parameter freshness check.

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?

Two short sentences, with the return values first and the usage guidance second. Every word contributes meaning, and no redundant or filler content is present.

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 tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know to call and interpret the result. No missing preconditions, side effects, or return-value details are likely to block correct usage.

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 100% schema coverage, so the description does not need to explain parameter meanings. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, a 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?

The description uses a specific verb 'Vrati' (returns) and clearly identifies the resource: data freshness information including last activation time, live segment count, and last run status. It is immediately distinguishable from the drug-list sibling tools because it addresses freshness rather than content lists.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: call this tool first when wanting to know whether the data is fresh. It does not name exclusions or alternatives, but no sibling tool appears to serve the same freshness-check purpose, so the guidance is sufficient.

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