remnawave_system_get_health

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It merely states '(read)' but omits details about authentication needs, rate limits, side effects, or return format. The tool likely performs a safe read, but this is not explicit.

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 extremely short (one phrase), but this brevity sacrifices necessary detail. For a health check tool with multiple parameters and no output schema, it is under-specified. A well-structured description would add parameter guidance or expected output.

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 absence of output schema, complex nested parameters, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain the purpose of each parameter, the response structure, or any behavioral traits, leaving the agent with insufficient information for correct invocation.

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%, and the description does not mention any of the 4 parameters (payload, confirmToken, responseMode, mutationApproved). The meaning of these parameters, especially responseMode or mutationApproved, is not explained, leaving the agent without guidance on how to invoke the tool correctly.

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 'Remnawave system.get_health (read)' clearly indicates this is a read-only health check tool. The verb 'get' and resource 'health' are specific, and it distinguishes from other system tools like get_bandwidth_stats or get_metadata by naming the endpoint explicitly.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context about prerequisites, when not to use it, or comparison to sibling tools like remnawave_system_get_stats or remnawave_system_get_recap is given.

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