get_cluster_health

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

Description mentions returned components but lacks details on side effects (none expected as read-only), rate limits, auth requirements, or error handling. Since no annotations exist, the description carries the full burden but does not fully disclose behavioral traits.

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?

Description is concise with 6 lines including an Args section. No wasted words, but the Args section could be formatted more compactly. Still efficient.

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 output schema exists, description covers parameters and high-level return components. Missing details on error responses and prerequisites, but overall adequate for a health-check 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 has 0% description coverage; description adds valuable context: example for cluster_id, default behavior for account_id (env var), and allowed values for cloud (aws/azure). This significantly compensates for schema gaps.

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?

Description clearly states it is a 'composite health check' returning node status, recent errors, and active rolls. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_cluster (full details), get_cluster_nodes (only nodes), and get_roll (only rolls).

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?

Description implies use for a quick health overview but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like get_cluster or list specific tools. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance provided.

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