enoch_queue_health

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read operation. The description adds detail on the returned data components (worker freshness, alerts, active runs, events), providing context beyond annotations. However, it does not explain the effect of the refresh_worker parameter, which defaults to true and may impact 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 concise (single sentence) and front-loaded with the tool's purpose. It lists key return components but could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points).

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, annotations present), the description covers the return data but omits parameter semantics and usage context. It is adequate but leaves gaps that a better description would fill.

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 description does not mention the parameter refresh_worker at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain this parameter, but it fails to do so, leaving the agent without guidance on how to use it.

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 returns queue health metrics including worker freshness, alert findings, active runs, and recent events. It identifies the resource and lists components, but does not explicitly distinguish it from similar health tools like enoch_core_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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as enoch_queue_alert_check or enoch_queue_list.

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