get_client_health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the tool returns a health snapshot modeled on a specific report and lists included fields. However, it does not disclose potential behavior like error handling, performance constraints, or whether it is a read-only operation, leaving some gaps.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and usage. Every word adds value, with no redundant or irrelevant information.

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 the low complexity (one parameter, no nested objects, and an output schema exists), the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, and enough context for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter, with a clear description including example and case-insensitivity. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns a 'full learning-engagement health snapshot' for a single client account, listing specific data points like per-course completion rates, average scores, content freshness, delivery method, and contract renewal date. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_launcher_clients and get_lowest_performing_courses.

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 'Use this when someone asks how a specific client is doing, wants a health check before a renewal, or needs an overview of a client's engagement.' This provides clear guidance on when to use the tool, though it does not mention when not to use or alternatives.

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