orchestrator_info

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

Discloses that the tool always returns {ok:true} and never fails, and lists the return shape. Without annotations, this is sufficient, though it omits potential latency or auth details (likely irrelevant for this tool).

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?

Two sentences with no fluff: states purpose, return structure, and usage guidance upfront. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool without output schema, the description provides complete context: health snapshot contents, success guarantee, and recommended usage as first call.

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%. Baseline is 4; description adds no parameter info because none are needed.

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 the tool returns a full health snapshot with specific fields (version, config, agent count, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like config_get and agent_list by positioning itself as a first-call overview tool.

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?

Explicitly advises using this tool as the first call to confirm server health and discover current config before calling config_get or agent_list. Also notes it always succeeds, guiding error handling expectations.

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