Show Zynd identity state

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

Annotations already mark it as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds value by detailing the specific return fields (developer status, ID, key, persona, registry URL, filesystem locations), providing behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear first sentence stating purpose, a sentence on when to use, and a bullet-like list of return values. No unnecessary words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 simple context signals, the description is fully complete. It covers purpose, usage, and return values comprehensively. The agent has all needed information to decide and invoke correctly.

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 no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty properties). Per guidelines, baseline is 4 for zero parameters. The description does not need to explain parameters, but it compensates by describing the return values, which is helpful. Could be higher if it explicitly stated 'no parameters required'.

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 that the tool reports the user's current Zynd identity state, including login status, developer key, and persona registration. It uses specific verbs ('report') and resources ('identity state'), and implicitly distinguishes from siblings that perform actions like login or registration.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use this whenever the user asks "who am I on Zynd?", "am I logged in?", or as a quick health check before calling other tools.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke it and suggests using it as a prerequisite, which is exemplary.

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