sn_health

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

No annotations provided. The description only lists what is checked; it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or how it behaves on failure. Given the zero annotation burden, this is insufficient.

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?

One sentence of 15 words efficiently lists all check categories. No fluff, no repetition, perfectly front-loaded.

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?

No output schema and no annotations. The description omits what the response looks like, error handling, or return format. For a health check tool, an agent would need to know if the result is structured text, boolean flags, or a summary.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions already present. The tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameters (deep and timeout). Baseline 3 is appropriate as it does not detract nor enhance beyond schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'Check' and lists distinct resources: ServiceNow API connectivity, auth status, Chromium install state, and MCP server version. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like sn_query or manage_script_include.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no when-not-to-use context. Agent must infer from the description alone, which lacks contextual advice.

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