ping

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safe read-only behavior is covered. The description adds the context that this is a smoke test, confirming it is a lightweight utility with no side effects. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 only two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by the usage caveat. It contains no fluff and every word contributes to understanding.

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?

This is a trivial tool with a single parameter, strong annotations, and an output schema present. The description fully covers its purpose and usage. The 'smoke test only' caveat is sufficient guidance for when to use it. No additional details are needed.

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 schema has only one parameter ('message') with no description, so the tool description must clarify its meaning. 'Echo a message back' implies the message parameter is the text to be echoed, but it does not provide additional details such as format, length limits, or echo behavior. The description offers minimal compensation for the 0% schema coverage.

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 the tool's function: 'Echo a message back.' The phrase 'Smoke test only' clarifies its limited scope, distinguishing it from siblings like search_files and query_records which perform substantive operations. This is a specific verb+resource with clear scope.

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 explicitly says 'Smoke test only,' which tells the agent this tool is intended solely for connectivity checks and not for real-world data retrieval. While it does not name alternative tools, the context is clear enough that the agent should not use this for substantive tasks.

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