enterprise_health

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly confirm safety, permissions, or side effects. Behavioral traits like response structure or data scope are omitted.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with key concepts. It is efficiently written but could add useful details without sacrificing brevity.

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 no output schema and many sibling tools, the description fails to explain what the tool returns or how it fits into the broader toolset. It lacks completeness for an agent to understand its role.

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, achieving 100% schema coverage. Per guidelines, the baseline score is 4. The description adds minimal meaning but is not required to explain parameters.

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 mentions 'enterprise health, metrics, and non-secret config status,' which indicates the tool provides health and status information. However, it lacks a specific verb (e.g., 'get', 'retrieve') and does not clearly differentiate from sibling tools like enterprise_policy_status or engine_status.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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