Eight Sleep Connection Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by stating the tool does not call Eight Sleep and does not expose secrets, which are important safety traits. It also lists specific local checks, giving the agent a clearer behavioral model without contradicting any annotation.

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 a single sentence that efficiently aggregates all key actions and non-behaviors. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Check' and wastes no words. The negative constraints are embedded concisely, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 a rich output schema and strong annotations, the description covers core purpose and safety traits, but it leaves out usage context and parameter semantics. The 'client' parameter is unexplained and the description does not clarify what 'mutation gate' or 'privacy mode' mean in practice. Overall, it is adequate but has clear gaps in guiding an agent on when to use it and how to configure it.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It does not mention 'client' or 'response_format' at all. While the enums and defaults provide some structure, the semantic purpose of the 'client' parameter is left entirely unexplained, and the description offers no help in choosing values or understanding their effect.

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 the tool's purpose with the verb 'Check' and enumerates specific resources: env, local config, token file, Node version, privacy mode, and mutation gate. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly noting it does not call Eight Sleep or expose secrets, which clarifies it is a local diagnostic rather than an API interaction.

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 implies usage for local environment verification and explicitly states it does not call Eight Sleep, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives. Sibling names exist, but no routing logic is given, so the agent must infer the appropriate context.

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