tunnel_status

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'Inspect the current tunnel' without disclosing what 'current' means, whether the operation is read-only, or what state might be affected. This lacks behavioral detail.

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 very short (5 words), but it is appropriately sized for a simple action with no parameters. However, it could be more structured by front-loading key details about what information is returned.

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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain what 'current tunnel' means, what the status output contains, or any side effects. The tool requires more context to be complete.

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 zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that the action is inspection, which is sufficient for parameterless tools per the calibration baseline.

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 uses a verb ('Inspect') and a resource ('current tunnel') which clearly indicates the action. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like tunnel_close or tunnel_listen, lacking specificity about what 'inspect' entails.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tunnel_open or tunnel_listen. No context about prerequisites or conditions provided.

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