codex_health_summary

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

The description states the tool is 'read-only' and does not start the app-server, which are key behavioral traits. However, with no annotations present, the description should provide more details on data freshness, caching behavior, or error handling, which are missing.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or unnecessary details.

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 presence of an output schema and 8 optional parameters with defaults, the description covers the core purpose and the main constraint (no app-server startup). However, it lacks guidance on parameter usage, which reduces completeness for this moderately complex tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining the parameters. It does not mention any of the 8 parameters (e.g., operation_id, workflow_id, since_minutes) or how they influence the health summary. This is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 verb 'get' and the resource 'compact read-only MCP/Codex health summary'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings by noting it avoids starting the app-server or returning large logs, making its purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 mentions the tool is intended 'for orchestrators' and highlights that it avoids starting the app-server or returning large logs, which gives clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives among the 32 sibling tools.

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