esxi_health

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context by listing the specific health dimensions returned, which goes slightly beyond annotations. However, with an output schema present, return details are redundant, and no additional behavioral context (e.g., freshness, scope) is given.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the resource and lists the covered fields without waste.

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 zero parameters, a present output schema, and rich annotations, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it. The only minor gap is lack of explicit routing versus siblings like esxi_host_summary.

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 no parameters, so the baseline is 4. No parameter semantics are needed, and the description correctly omits them.

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 states a specific purpose: retrieving ESXi host overall health status, enumerating the exact fields it covers (connection state, maintenance mode, overallStatus, uptime, quickStats). This distinguishes it from siblings like esxi_host_summary or esxi_inventory, though the differentiation is not explicit.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as esxi_host_summary or esxi_inventory. The description only states what it returns, not when an agent should choose it.

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