Run read-only Provider health check

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context: 'Defaults to OpenAI' (default provider behavior) and 'never switches nodes' (explicitly no failover). This goes beyond the annotation hints and clarifies the tool's non-disruptive nature.

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 two sentences, with each sentence carrying distinct value: the first defines the action and scope, the second covers default and constraints. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple with rich annotations and an output schema, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, the complete lack of parameter descriptions (0% schema coverage) leaves gaps for config_path and include_node_name. The description is adequate for purpose and behavior but not fully complete for parameter understanding.

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. It only hints at provider_id semantics via 'Defaults to OpenAI,' but config_path and include_node_name are left unexplained. This is insufficient for three parameters with no schema descriptions.

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: 'Probe direct connectivity and the configured Provider path through its selected AI group.' It uses a specific verb ('probe') and resource, and the title adds 'read-only Provider health check.' The phrase 'never switches nodes' distinguishes it from failover-related sibling tools.

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 context: it is a read-only health check that defaults to OpenAI and does not switch nodes. This signals it is safe to run anytime, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when to prefer this over similar tools like check_provider_paths.

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