Get Health

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses return fields (status, page/chunk counts, MCP version, legacy setting) and error handling (inspect server logs). However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or has no side effects.

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 extremely concise with no wasted words. It uses clear structure with headings and bullet-like sections. Every sentence adds value, e.g., 'On error: inspect server logs.'

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 zero parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage, return values, and error handling. No additional information is needed for this simple health-check tool.

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 schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (empty). The description does not need to add parameter meaning. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, which is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Return Memkin MCP health and capability metadata.', which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_entity_profile' or 'get_session_context' by focusing on health diagnostics.

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 description provides explicit usage guidelines: 'When to use: diagnose database counts, MCP version, and legacy tool exposure.' and 'When NOT to use: retrieve memory content; use read tools.' This clearly directs the agent to appropriate alternatives.

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