util_api_health_report

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

Describes what is measured but omits behavioral details such as network calls, potential timeouts, rate limits, or that it's read-only and non-destructive. With no annotations, the description should cover these.

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?

One concise sentence with no fluff, but it omits critical parameter information, making it less effective than it could be.

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 complex measurements and minimal schema, the description should explain input requirements and output format. It provides neither, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 0% description coverage (only an 'arguments' object with additionalProperties true). The description never explains what parameters the endpoint expects (e.g., URL), leaving the agent unable to construct a valid call.

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 it measures endpoint status, latency, redirects, content type, and reachability. This distinguishes it from similar siblings like util_url_health by emphasizing multiple metrics in one call, but does not explicitly differentiate.

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?

Implied usage for comprehensive API health checks, but no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like util_url_health or util_dns_lookup, nor any exclusions.

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