server_health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'check availability' without describing return format, error behavior, or network consequences. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior.

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 that is front-loaded and directly conveys the purpose. No unnecessary 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 has no parameters and no output schema. For a simple health check, the description is arguably sufficient but lacks details on the response format (e.g., boolean, status code). Completeness is adequate but not exceptional.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information. Baseline score of 4 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 clearly states what the tool does: 'Check DECIMER FastAPI server availability.' It uses a specific verb ('Check') and a resource ('server availability'), and it distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'analyze_chemical_image'.

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?

No explicit guidelines on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the tool's purpose (check server availability) is distinct from the sibling, making usage implicit. A score of 3 is appropriate as there is no guidance but context provides some clarity.

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