control_health

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the mode distinction (terse vs full) but doesn't elaborate on exact behavior or response shape; output schema accounts for that.

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?

One sentence with zero wasted words; default behavior is front-loaded, alternative follows.

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?

With only one optional param, output schema present, and annotations covering safety, the description is adequately complete. No missing prerequisites or side effects.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that detail=full is for diagnostics, which gives semantic meaning to the enum value, but doesn't explain what 'terse' vs 'full' includes. Still, for a single parameter, it partially fills the gap.

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?

States a specific verb ('Report') and resource ('control-path health'), with explicit default and alternative modes. Distinct from siblings that handle waiting, surfaces, agents, and messaging.

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?

Provides clear context for using the default terse mode and when to request full diagnostics. Doesn't name alternative tools, but the context is specific enough that an agent can infer when a health check is needed.

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