memory_selftest

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool runs canned queries and provides latencies, which suggests a non-mutating diagnostic role. However, it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects or describe any additional behavioral details.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core concept ('Health check') and efficiently conveys the scope and output. Every word adds value, with no redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and behavior. It could be more specific about what the canned queries check, but for a self-test tool this is sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no semantics to explain. The description does not need to add parameter information, and the baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 a health check that runs canned queries against a built-in seed pack, with latencies. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling memory operation tools.

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 phrase 'Health check' implies the tool is for diagnostics, but there is no explicit statement about when to use it versus alternatives. Usage is implied rather than clearly specified, with no exclusions or alternative mentions.

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