Health / whoami

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses what is checked (auth mode, Smoobu user, apartment count, rate-limit status) and a key security property ('Never returns keys'), which is valuable behavioral context. It does not explicitly confirm read-only safety or side effects, but 'Checks' strongly implies a non-mutating operation.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core behavior and followed by a critical output constraint. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

For a zero-parameter diagnostic tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the essential return fields (auth mode, user, apartment count, rate-limit status) and a security assurance. An agent has enough to decide to call it and interpret the result.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline score of 4 applies. There are no parameter semantics to clarify, and the description appropriately focuses on what the tool inspects rather than inputs.

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 states a specific verb ('Checks') and resource ('each configured account') and enumerates exactly what is inspected: auth mode, Smoobu user, live apartment count, rate-limit status. This clearly distinguishes it from the booking/property siblings, which are all domain operations rather than diagnostics.

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 implies usage as a diagnostic/verification tool ('Checks each configured account') but does not explicitly say when to call it versus other tools, nor does it list prerequisites or exclusions. There are no obvious alternatives among siblings, so the implied context is adequate but lacks explicit guidance.

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