health_check

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds useful context that the runtime probe occurs 'without downloads,' clarifying that it will not trigger network activity or installs, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The primary health check is stated first and the optional probe second.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover safety traits. The description is nearly complete for a simple health-check tool, though the meaning of 'connection/storage' could be more concrete.

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 explain probe_runtime. It partially does so by saying the probe is optional and targets the configured Python runtime without downloads, but it does not state the default or clarify what happens when the parameter is false.

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 states a specific verb and resource set: checking connection/storage and optionally probing the Python runtime. It is clearly a health-check tool, though the term 'connection/storage' is broad and does not explicitly distinguish it from diagnostics siblings such as get_capabilities or get_workspace_state.

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 word 'optionally' implies when the probe is relevant, but there is no explicit guidance on when to call health_check versus alternatives like get_capabilities. Usage is inferable for a health-check tool but not directly stated.

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