diagnose

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is a read-only, non-destructive check with a 5-second timeout per check. The return structure is also detailed, leaving no ambiguity about side effects.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. It lists return sections clearly. Minor improvement could be more structured formatting, but overall efficient.

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 no parameters and no annotations, the description provides complete behavioral and output context. Return sections are fully described, and the tool's scope is well-defined.

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 no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, baseline is 4 for zero parameters. The description adds no parameter info because none exist, which is appropriate.

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 diagnoses the platform environment by checking specific components (Python, dependencies, Chrome, CDP ports, cookies, errors). It emphasizes it does no actual scraping, distinguishing it from all sibling scraping/retrieval 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 implicitly indicates this is for diagnostic purposes before scraping, stating it performs 'pure local diagnosis' and does 'no actual scraping.' However, it does not explicitly list when to use vs alternatives or provide exclusion cases.

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