opensearch_cluster_health

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

Discloses required privilege (cluster:monitor/health) and error handling (403). Without annotations, this is transparent about access and safety. Could explicitly state it is a read-only operation, but the description is still informative.

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?

Three sentences cover privilege, returns, and usage without wasted words. Information is front-loaded and well-organized.

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 zero parameters and an output schema, the description adequately covers privilege, return fields, and use case. It is complete for tool selection and basic invocation.

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?

No parameters exist in the input schema, and schema coverage is 100%. Baseline score of 4 applies as there is nothing to add beyond what the schema already defines.

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 that the tool returns cluster status with specific fields (green/yellow/red, node count, active shards, unassigned shards). It distinguishes itself from sibling opensearch_test by suggesting fallback on 403, clarifying its purpose.

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?

Explicitly advises when to use: to confirm backend is not degraded before trusting query results. Also provides a conditional alternative: if 403, use opensearch_test. This gives clear when-to and when-not-to guidance.

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