powerswarm_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this retrieves current state and defaults to newest when run_id is omitted, but it does not state read-only/safety properties, auth requirements, or error behavior.

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?

A single compact sentence, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the scoped return fields. There is no 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?

For a simple status tool, it covers the default behavior and high-level return contents. With no output schema and no annotations, however, it stops short of specifying output shape, safety characteristics, or edge cases.

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 only parameter, run_id, has 0% schema description coverage. The description adds important default semantics—omitting run_id returns the newest run—but does not explain run_id format, expected identifier type, or accepted values.

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?

States a specific resource ('a run') and action ('current state'), and enumerates what the state contains (lanes, attempts, reasons, waves). It separates status from start/cancel siblings implicitly, though it does not explicitly contrast with powerswarm_report.

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?

Gives one usage rule: omit run_id to get the newest run. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance versus siblings such as powerswarm_report, and no prerequisites are stated.

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