Grafana health

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful behavior that it reports version and database status — meaningful because there is no output schema to reveal the return shape.

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 with no filler. The action and the returned information both land immediately, and nothing is repeated from the title or annotations.

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 no-parameter, read-only probe with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description supplies the essential facts: what is verified and what comes back. Only a hint about the response format or failure behavior is absent, which is a small omission.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate; the 4 baseline applies. The schema is empty and coverage is 100%, leaving no semantic gaps for the description to fill.

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?

Specific verb ('check ... is reachable') plus the exact resource (Grafana instance) and the payload it returns (version, database status). It is unambiguously distinct from every sibling, which all operate on dashboards, folders, datasources, alerts, or annotations rather than instance health.

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 phrase 'Check the Grafana instance is reachable' clearly implies the usage context (connectivity/health verification before or after other calls). No alternatives or exclusions are named, but for a parameterless singleton health probe there is no sibling to route against, so the gap is minor.

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