memento_health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It lists action names but does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only status, destructive potential, permission requirements, or side effects. The agent cannot infer safety or constraints.

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 very concise—a single sentence that front-loads 'System diagnostics.' The list of actions is compact but could benefit from formatting (e.g., bullets) for clarity. 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?

Given no output schema, the description should explain what each action returns or any side effects. It does not. The tool has multiple actions but no explanation of their purpose or output format. This is insufficient for an agent to reliably use the tool.

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 coverage is only 33% (only 'query' has a description). The description enumerates all valid values for the 'action' parameter, which adds value beyond the schema's enum list. However, it does not describe the 'query' or 'workspace_root' parameters beyond the schema, leaving gaps.

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 identifies the tool as 'System diagnostics', which conveys a specific verb-resource combination. It lists distinct actions (status, health, memory, etc.) that define its scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like memento or memento_kg.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as memento or memento_graph. The description does not provide context for different actions or scenarios, leaving the agent without criteria for selection.

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