Arduino CLI Doctor

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces a non-mutating behavior ('Check', 'return instructions'), with no contradiction. It adds useful context by specifying the conditional outcome when the CLI is missing and OS-specificity of the instructions.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states both the check and the conditional return behavior with no filler. Every word contributes to the tool's operational meaning.

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 read-only diagnostic with an output schema, the description covers the core behavior completely: what is checked and what is returned when missing. The presence of sibling install_arduino_cli also provides surrounding context for how this tool fits into the workflow.

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 no parameter-level meaning is needed. The description fully satisfies the parameter semantics dimension by not pretending to rely on any inputs; baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 action ('Check whether arduino-cli is available') and a resource ('arduino-cli'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also differentiates from the sibling install_arduino_cli by focusing on detection and returning instructions rather than performing installation.

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 clearly implies usage before installing or when verifying the CLI's presence: 'return OS-specific installation instructions if missing' indicates the tool is a diagnostic step. It does not explicitly name alternatives like install_arduino_cli, so it stops short of fully explicit when/when-not guidance.

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