doctor_health_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'deterministic diagnostics' implying read-only, but does not explicitly confirm whether mutations occur, what side effects exist, or any required permissions. This is a significant gap.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it is a dense list of items without clear structure. It front-loads the core action ('Run deterministic diagnostics') but the list could be more readable.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to explain the return value or how to interpret results. It also omits usage context and parameter explanation, making it incomplete for a diagnostic tool with one unexplained parameter.

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 single parameter 'root' is completely undocumented in both the schema (0% coverage) and the description. The description lists diagnostics but does not explain how the 'root' parameter influences the checks, leaving the agent without critical guidance.

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 states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Run') and lists the exact resources it diagnoses (SQLite sidecar indexes, GROBID enrichment, etc.). It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are primarily for document operations and ingestion.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It simply lists what it checks, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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