dt3_status

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds a useful side-effect clarification ('Does not launch the app') that goes beyond the annotations, but does not detail other behavioral aspects like error handling or output.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that convey purpose and a key limitation without any filler or 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?

The description provides the core purpose and a critical non-behavior, but leaves terms like 'readiness' and 'scope configuration' undefined. Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description is mostly sufficient but lacks a bit of contextual depth.

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?

There are no parameters to describe, so schema coverage is effectively 100%. The description does not add parameter-related detail, but none is needed, so the baseline score of 3 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 clearly states the action ('Check') and the target ('DEVONthink 3 readiness and scope configuration'), and explicitly notes a key non-behavior ('Does not launch the app'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 a negative constraint ('Does not launch the app') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like dt3_databases or dt3_search. The intended use case is implied rather than stated.

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