Summarize scrape target health to verify data reliability before trusting query results. Check up/down counts per job to catch silent missing data during incidents.
Summarize scrape target health (up/down counts per job). Check this first during an incident: query results are only as trustworthy as the scrapes behind them, and a down target silently turns into missing data everywhere else.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that a down target 'silently turns into missing data everywhere else' and ties tool output to query trustworthiness. It could mention read-only/no-side-effect behavior explicitly, but 'summarize' strongly implies it.
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?
Two sentences, both purposeful: the first states what the tool returns, the second states when and why to call it. 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?
For a parameterless, simple summary tool, the description fully covers what it does, what it returns, and when to use it. No output schema is needed because the return shape is stated in plain language.
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 has zero parameters, so there is no parameter information the description must add. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on output and usage rather than padding.
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 uses a specific verb ('Summarize') and names a precise resource ('scrape target health') with the exact output ('up/down counts per job'). It clearly stands apart from sibling query/list tools by focusing on health rather than data retrieval.
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 gives explicit situational guidance: 'Check this first during an incident' and explains why. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough that an agent can decide when this tool is the right first step.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.