waypath_health

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

Declares read-only nature and safety to call any time, listing checks performed. Without annotations, description carries full burden; missing specification of return format (e.g., JSON status object) is a minor gap.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, safety, and sibling distinction. However, given no output schema, description could specify what the tool returns (e.g., a status object). Still adequate for a simple health check.

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?

No parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline set at 4. Description confirms zero parameters but adds no extra value beyond schema.

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 it is a read-only health check listing specific components (SQLite, FTS5 sync, source adapters, truth-kernel row counts). Distinguishes from sibling waypath_source_status by noting it's a single diagnostic entrypoint vs adapter-specific detail.

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?

Explicitly says 'Safe to call any time and from any context' and 'Use as a single diagnostic entrypoint before opening a support issue; for adapter-specific detail call waypath_source_status.' Provides clear when and when-not to use.

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