Check Kiwi TCMS connection

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral details about returning URL, configured Product, and product count, as well as checking credentials, offering useful context beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the verb 'Checks,' and every clause adds value: what it does, what it returns, and when to use it. No redundant or generic filler.

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 simple, zero-parameter, read-only diagnostic tool, the description is fully adequate. It covers purpose, output, and usage context, and no output schema exists to add further detail. The description stands on its own.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document. Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool gets a baseline of 4, and the description appropriately does not spend space on 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 'Checks connectivity and credentials' and 'Use for diagnostics,' making the tool's purpose specific and distinct from the many sibling CRUD tools. It also mentions the output (URL, Product, product count), further clarifying its role.

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 clear context by saying 'Use for diagnostics,' which tells the agent when to invoke this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though no sibling tool serves a similar diagnostic function.

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