get_gateway_health

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

No annotations are provided, and the description legitimately conveys that this is a read-only, real-time status retrieval. However, it omits additional behavioral context such as authentication requirements, potential latency, or what happens if the gateway is unhealthy.

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?

A single, information-dense sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action ('Returns') and itemizes the key data areas.

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 zero-parameter, read-only health probe with an output schema available, the description names all relevant result categories and leaves nothing essential missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, which makes parameter semantics trivial. Per the rubric, the baseline is 4, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter noise.

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?

Description uses 'Returns' with a specific resource: real-time health, anomaly circuit breaker state, and quota usage of the database gateway. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling query/mutation tools.

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 implies a diagnostics/health-check context but does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives or mention exclusions. Since no sibling performs gateway health checks, the context is clear enough.

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