agy_doctor

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

With no annotations, the description takes on the burden. It discloses caching behavior ('drop the cached binary probe'), the return format ('structured report (no secrets)'), and appropriateness for MCP. It doesn't explicitly state safety or side effects, but the context is adequate.

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?

Three concise sentences front-load the purpose, describe the output, and then explain the parameter. No wasted words.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter) and an output schema exists. The description covers the purpose, output nature, and the cache nuance, making it complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description fully explains the one parameter: 'Pass `force_refresh=true` to drop the cached binary probe' and gives the exact scenario for using it.

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 states 'Run capability + auth + session-store probes' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like agy_status or agy_read as a diagnostic tool.

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?

It provides clear context for the force_refresh parameter ('use after upgrading the underlying agy / gemini CLI'), but does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when-not to use it. The diagnostic purpose is implicit.

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