health

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Check' signals a read-only diagnostic action, which is useful, but the description does not disclose what the tool returns, how it behaves if unhealthy, or any side effects. This is minimal but sufficient for a simple health probe.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence contains everything: action, resource, and condition. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 health check, the description states the single responsibility clearly. However, because there is no output schema, it leaves the exact return shape implicit; an agent must infer whether the response is a boolean, status object, or details.

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 the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter detail the description needs to add. The empty input schema and 100% schema coverage fully address this dimension.

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 a specific verb, 'Check', and identifies the exact resource, 'Nexus Memory', along with the target state 'running and healthy'. This clearly distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which perform other operations such as recall, update, or backup.

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 implies a diagnostic/preflight use case, but it does not explicitly say when to call this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. There is no mention of prerequisites or timing, leaving usage to inference.

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