Run Maintenance Scan

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that scans also run on a daily schedule, but it omits the call's operational shape: whether the scan blocks or runs asynchronously, approximate latency, and that link_check=true spawns a separate async job.

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 short sentences, action and return value front-loaded, with the scheduling fact as supporting context. Nothing is wasted.

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 zero-required-parameter trigger with no output schema, the description covers intent and return ('fresh report') adequately, and annotations carry the safety profile. It stops short of describing scan duration/blocking behavior or what the report contains.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage and a single optional boolean, the schema already documents link_check fully, including its async side effect. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource+outcome: run a site-health scan now and return the fresh report. 'Fresh' implicitly contrasts with the sibling get_maintenance_report (which presumably returns the stored report), but the sibling is never named, so the differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.

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 timing context ('now', plus the note that scans already run once a day) hints that this is for on-demand freshness rather than routine reads, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no alternative such as get_maintenance_report is named for the case where a recent report already exists.

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