Recipes Health Check

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this is a composite covering four distinct areas, which is useful scoping context, but nothing about return shape, cost, or execution 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?

A single front-loaded sentence names the tool type and the four covered areas with zero filler. Nothing is wasted.

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?

With an output schema present (so return values need no explanation) and no parameters, the description supplies the essential scoping—what the health check spans. It is largely complete, only missing guidance on when to prefer it over sibling diagnostics.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the absence of inputs.

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 states a specific action (run a health check) and enumerates the four resources it covers: connection, active session, warehouse state, and credit consumption. An agent can tell this is a broad diagnostic/composite tool, though it doesn't sharply differentiate itself from other 'recipes_' siblings.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives are named. The word 'Composite recipe' implies it bundles several checks, but the description never says when an agent should reach for this versus narrower diagnostics like warehouses_list_warehouses or governance_get_current_context.

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