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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, confirming it's a safe read operation. The description adds 'worst first' and 'in plain words', which hints at sorting and summarization behavior, but doesn't detail return format, pagination, or what 'plain words' means, leaving gaps for a read-only tool.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the core idea. It's appropriately sized, though the phrase 'in plain words' is somewhat informal and could be more precise.

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 the tool's cross-platform aggregate nature and lack of output schema, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain what constitutes a 'finding', how results are structured, or how they relate to sibling tools, leaving significant gaps for proper invocation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the single 'limit' parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter details beyond what the schema provides, meeting the 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?

The description vaguely states it surfaces 'what needs attention' across platforms, which is a purpose but lacks a specific verb and resource. It doesn't clearly distinguish from siblings like security_posture or backup_status, which also cover health-related concerns.

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. With several sibling tools covering specific domains, the description doesn't indicate that this is a cross-platform aggregate or when an agent should prefer it over domain-specific tools.

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