apihealth_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Show' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not state what the tool returns, whether it performs any network calls, or how defaults are structured. The lack of an output schema makes this gap more significant.

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 short sentence with no superfluous words. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it highly skimmable for an agent.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is too sparse. It does not define what 'API health defaults' are, what the response will contain, or how this tool relates to apihealth_check and apihealth_check_many, leaving an agent uncertain about its appropriate use.

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 has zero parameters, so the 0-param baseline of 4 applies. The description adds nothing about parameters, but none are needed; the word 'defaults' does not imply additional arguments.

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 uses the specific verb 'Show' and targets the resource 'API health defaults,' which conveys a clear action and object. However, 'defaults' is somewhat ambiguous and doesn't explicitly contrast with the sibling tools apihealth_check and apihealth_check_many.

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 gives no guidance on when to call this tool versus its siblings. There are no explicit conditions, alternatives, or exclusions, so the agent must infer usage entirely from the name and the word 'defaults.'

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