zero_health

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

Description indicates it writes health.json and returns counts and top20, providing output structure. However, no annotations exist, and the description does not disclose side effects, permissions, or whether it is read-only, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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?

Description is a single sentence that efficiently conveys purpose and output. Could be slightly clearer for non-Thai speakers but overall earns its place.

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 parameters, output schema, or annotations, the description covers main actions and return format. However, it omits details about dependencies (e.g., required files) and assumes default context, leaving some gaps.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds value by detailing the scope of the health check, which is meaningful beyond the empty 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?

Description clearly states it performs a complete health check covering links.jsonl, frontmatter, body wikilinks, and packs, and outputs counts and top20. It distinguishes itself from siblings like zero_resolve and zero_write_note which handle different tasks.

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 explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives, but its unique purpose among siblings makes usage implied. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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