get_system_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers: it declares read-only, discloses the failure mode (individual gather failures fall back to zero values in the errors field, never fatal), and warns about cost (heaviest call in the server). This is exactly the behavioral context annotations would otherwise have to supply.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: what it returns, how it fails and what it costs, and how to choose it over siblings. Front-loaded with the resource and scope before the routing guidance.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are handled structurally; the description still adds the one thing the schema can't convey, the errors-field fallback semantics. For a zero-param aggregation tool with heavy cost, nothing an agent needs is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and no parameter semantics are needed. The description correctly spends no words on 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?

States a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('one broad snapshot') and enumerates exactly what is aggregated: system, CPU, temperature, memory, disk, network, load, top processes, and Docker. An agent can distinguish it from the dozens of single-domain siblings without opening any schema.

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 routes the agent: use as the single entry point for a wide overview, use get_system_health_check for pass/fail status, and prefer targeted tools for focused detail. Both the when and the when-not alternatives are named.

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