zen_health

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

The description lists what information is returned (bridge version, ports, etc.) but does not disclose behavioral traits like side effects (likely read-only), authorization needs, or rate limits. With no annotations, more behavioral detail would be helpful.

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?

Single sentence effectively enumerates the information returned, but the list is somewhat dense and could be structured with bullet points or categories for easier parsing.

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?

Given no output schema, the description lists fields but does not specify data types, nesting, or format of values. For a tool returning multiple pieces of heterogeneous information, more detail on structure would improve 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?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.

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 states 'Extended health/status' and lists specific items, clearly indicating the tool returns comprehensive health information. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like zen_check or zen_status, which likely provide simpler or different health data.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not describe when zen_health is appropriate compared to zen_check, zen_status, or other monitoring tools, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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