Run every check of one of your targets immediately (outside the schedule) and return pass/fail per check with latency, judge cost and any incident opened or closed. Use it right after enrolling, or to confirm a fix. Requires an API key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| targetId | Yes | target id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly=false. Description adds that incidents may be opened or closed, making the side effects concrete. No contradiction with annotations.
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?
Two concise sentences. The main action and result are front-loaded, followed by use-case guidance. No unnecessary detail.
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?
Describes both the action and the expected return values (pass/fail, latency, judge cost, incidents). Enough for an agent to understand what the tool does and what it produces.
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 parameter targetId is described only as 'target id' in the schema, and the tool description adds little beyond that. It is self-explanatory, but no extra meaning is provided.
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 the tool runs every check for a target immediately and lists the returned data. Distinct from siblings like add_check or get_status by focusing on executing all checks now.
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?
Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: right after enrolling or to confirm a fix. Does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but the intended scenarios are clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.