doctor

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

No annotations provided. Description discloses types of issues detected (fragmentation, stale knowledge, etc.) but does not explicitly state read-only nature or other behavioral traits like side effects or auth requirements.

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?

Bilingual structure is clear: purpose, detection list, alternative mention. Slightly redundant between languages but front-loaded and efficient overall.

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 simple tool (one param, no required, has output schema), description covers purpose and parameter. Could add example or mention non-destructiveness, but adequate for context.

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?

Only parameter 'output_format' with default 'markdown'. Description lists allowed values ('markdown' or 'json'), which the schema (only title, type, default) lacks. Adds meaningful semantic choice.

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?

Clearly states verb 'check' (implied) and resource 'Engram memory system health'. Lists specific issues detected. Distinguishes from sibling CLI command via explicit alternative.

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?

Describes when to use (health check, detect issues) and provides alternative for CLI conflict view. Lacks explicit exclusion of other sibling tools but context implies diagnostic vs retrieval.

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