get_health_trends

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't repeat safety traits. It adds context about data provenance (scheduled automations), but doesn't disclose behavior such as time ranges, empty results, or how many trends are summarized.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's function and data source.

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 simple read-only summarization tool with one optional parameter and good annotations, the description adequately explains the core purpose and data source. It doesn't describe the output format, but for this simple case it's reasonably complete.

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 single 'limit' parameter is not mentioned in the description, and schema description coverage is 0%. With low coverage, the description should compensate but fails to explain what the limit applies to (e.g., number of data points, days). The schema's default/min/max help but don't fully clarify semantics.

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 the specific verb 'Summarize' and clearly identifies the resource as 'CPU, RAM, disk, and alert trends.' It also names the source data (scheduled get_full_snapshot or get_system_alerts automations), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that report real-time usage.

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 phrase 'captured by scheduled automations' implies this is for historical trend summaries rather than real-time queries, giving clear context relative to siblings like get_cpu_usage and get_ram_usage. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the intended scenario is clear.

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