check_sla

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, or requires specific permissions. The mention of 'circuit breaker state' hints at potential mutation but is not clarified.

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?

Single, concise sentence front-loads the purpose and metrics. No wasted words.

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?

Without output schema or annotations, the description lacks detail on return format, filtering, and behavior when parameters are omitted. For a tool with two optional string params, more context is needed for correct invocation.

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 description must explain parameters. It mentions 'per tool' but does not clarify what toolName and serverName represent, their expected format, or whether they are required. Only implicit connection.

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?

Description clearly states the tool checks SLA compliance with specific metrics (p50/p95 latency, error rate, circuit breaker state) and scope ('per tool'). This distinguishes it from siblings like check_health or audit_costs.

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 vs alternatives. Sibling tools include check_health and audit_costs, but the description provides no context for differentiation or conditions for use.

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