agoragentic_status

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

No annotations provided, so description must convey behavior. It indicates a read-like operation returning JSON, but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. Adequate but minimal.

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?

Three concise, front-loaded sentences with clear main action. No extraneous information.

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?

Covers key aspects of the status tool; mentions common data points. 'etc.' is vague, but presence of output schema fills gaps. Mostly complete for a simple get-status operation.

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?

No parameters in schema, so description cannot add meaning. Baseline 4 applies as schema coverage is trivially 100% and description need not compensate.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves 'llm-router agent status on Agoragentic' and lists specific data points (registration status, seller slots, listings). Distinguishes from sibling tools (agoragentic_browse, task, wallet) which have different purposes.

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?

Usage is implied (get status), but no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., agoragentic_browse for browsing) nor when not to use. Lacks context like prerequisites or limitations.

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