harbor_health

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

Beyond the `readOnlyHint` provided in the annotations, the description provides critical behavioral context regarding the output structure, specifically that missing component health will still be visible, aiding the agent in interpreting results.

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 definition is perfectly concise, front-loading the action and resource, and using a semi-colon efficiently to add a secondary behavioral detail without any fluff.

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?

For a low-complexity, read-only tool with a single optional parameter, the description is highly complete, covering the 'what' and a key 'how' regarding partial data.

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 input parameter 'target' is defined vaguely in the schema; the description adds no semantic meaning, constraints, or examples of valid input values, merely listing the parameter's existence.

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 identifies the tool's function as getting 'Harbor component health,' providing a specific and unambiguous purpose that distinguishes it from other management tasks.

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?

The tool provides a functional note about incomplete data ('unknown components remain visible'), but it does not offer explicit guidance on when to use this tool relative to other related health or diagnostics tools within the Harbor ecosystem.

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