Panel overview

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and non-destructive. The description adds no additional behavioral traits beyond mentioning that health/system metrics can be toggled off, which is more parameter semantics than behavior. No hidden side effects or permissions are disclosed.

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?

Very concise – two sentences. Front-loaded with 'Start here' and immediately enumerates the returned information. No fluff or redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description sufficiently lists the categories of information returned (version, host, record counts, CPU/memory/disk, clock/migration health). It is complete enough for an overview tool, though exact structure of the response is not specified.

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 descriptions cover both parameters at 100% (include_health and include_system are each described). The description text mentions 'unless you turn them off' which aligns with the defaults but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 returns panel version, host, record counts, and health/system metrics. It distinguishes itself from sibling list/get tools by positioning as an orientation overview ('Start here', 'One call to orient yourself before drilling in').

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use it: 'Start here' and 'One call to orient yourself before drilling in' – this is direct guidance relative to the many sibling tools for specific list/get operations.

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