lattice_health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool checks health and connectivity, which implies a read operation, but does not disclose behavioral traits like side effects, authentication needs, or response format. The description is too brief to adequately inform the agent of the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence with no fluff. Every word is essential. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the key purpose.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate for a simple health check tool. However, it lacks details on return values, error handling, or performance implications. For a tool with no complexity, this level of completeness is minimum viable.

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, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. Baseline 4 is appropriate as the schema already fully documents 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 clearly states the tool checks 'API health and database connectivity', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like lattice_get_database_credentials or lattice_get_database_connection, which focus on credentials or connections, not health.

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 provides an implied usage context (health checks) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as monitoring intervals or prerequisite conditions. No exclusions are mentioned.

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