overview

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, and the description reinforces it with the '[READ]' prefix while disclosing that this is an aggregate snapshot of three domains rather than a single resource. It does not mention pagination, latency, or failure behavior, but with annotations carrying the safety burden and no output schema, this is solid contextual disclosure.

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 short paragraphs, the purpose and routing rule front-loaded, with the argument note kept to a single line. No filler.

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 no-required-argument aggregate read with annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the selection policy, the param meaning, and the returned domains. Only the shape of the aggregated payload is left implicit, which is a minor gap.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single 'target' parameter, so the description must carry it entirely – and it does, explaining that it is the TrueNAS target name from config and that omission falls back to the default.

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?

It names a specific verb and resource ('one-shot health summary') and enumerates the covered domains (pools capacity/health, alerts, services), which cleanly distinguishes it from the granular siblings like pool_status, alert_list, and service_list.

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?

'Call this first to triage a TrueNAS system before drilling into a specific pool, dataset, or service' is explicit routing guidance, both telling the agent when to use it and pointing to the drill-down alternatives it supersedes on the first call.

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