Get Health

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds useful behavioral context about parallel async API calls for efficient retrieval. It also clarifies that the response includes a complete list of applications and adapters, which is beyond what the annotations convey. No contradictions.

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 moderately concise, with a clear opening sentence followed by supporting context. Some sentences are somewhat generic ('enables proactive monitoring and troubleshooting'), but the overall length is justified by explaining the parallel API behavior and the additional apps/adapters list.

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 tool has no parameters and a documented output schema, the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose, the scope of the health data, the method of retrieval (parallel async calls), and notes the additional app/adapter information. This is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 the input schema provides no semantic burden. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds relevant context about what data is retrieved. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.

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 retrieves comprehensive health information from the Itential Platform, with a specific verb ('get') and resource ('health information'). It distinguishes itself by noting it also provides a complete list of all applications and adapters, which separates it from sibling tools like get_applications and get_adapters.

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 outlines the purpose of health monitoring and mentions proactive monitoring and troubleshooting, implying when to use the tool. It also hints at an alternative use case by noting it returns the full application/adapter list, but it does not explicitly say when not to use it or when to prefer siblings.

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