health_analyze

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It does not indicate whether the tool is read-only, requires special permissions, or has performance implications. The description only says 'analyze' and 'shows', which suggests a read operation, but not explicitly.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the action verb 'Analyze'. No unnecessary words, clear structure.

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?

The description covers the core functionality and the parameter is fully documented. However, given no annotations, it lacks information on permissions, side effects, or whether it is a read-only operation. The output schema exists but its content is not hinted at.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the parameter is well-documented in the schema. The description adds extra context by stating that the output shows most and least used items, linking the parameter choices to the resulting analysis, which provides additional meaning beyond the 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?

The description clearly states it analyzes usage patterns across Looker content, specifically showing most and least used models, explores, and content. This is a specific action that distinguishes it from sibling tools like health_pulse or query.

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 it should be used to understand content usage, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of alternatives like query or health_pulse. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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