zernio_get_account_health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the core behavior (checking auth token validity) and implies a read-only operation. However, it does not specify return format, side effects, or any prerequisites like authentication requirements.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the purpose and key outcome. No extraneous words, and it is front-loaded with essential information.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic functionality. However, it lacks details on the return type (e.g., boolean or status object) and does not clarify if it's a read-only operation, which would enhance completeness.

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 input schema provides a description for accountId, and the tool description does not add any additional semantic meaning beyond that. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3, and no extra value is added by the description.

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 it checks the health/connection status of a social account, specifically whether the auth token is valid. It distinguishes from the sibling 'zernio_get_single_account_health' by the ability to check all accounts when accountId is omitted, which is implied by the parameter description.

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 usage via the parameter 'omit to check all accounts', but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus the related sibling 'zernio_get_single_account_health' or provide conditions for use. No exclusions or alternatives are stated.

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