create_heartbeat

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits, but it only states 'Create a new heartbeat monitor'. It does not disclose side effects, permissions required, idempotency, or what happens after creation (e.g., whether it starts immediately, returns an ID, etc.). This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 a single, concise sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is too brief to provide a complete understanding. It does not explain the creation process, return value, or how to use the created heartbeat (e.g., pinging). For a tool with 4 parameters, more context is needed to guide the agent effectively.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds the context of 'cron jobs or scheduled tasks', which relates to expectedInterval and gracePeriod, but does not explain parameter relationships or provide additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create a new heartbeat monitor for cron jobs or scheduled tasks' clearly states the verb (create), resource (heartbeat monitor), and context (cron jobs or scheduled tasks). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like create_feature_flag, create_status_page, and create_uptime_monitor by specifying the type of monitor and its intended use.

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 provides a clear use case: monitoring cron jobs or scheduled tasks, which helps the agent decide when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or offer alternatives, though the context is sufficiently guiding.

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