Detect existing install

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered without the description. The description adds only the 'admin' tag and the endpoint, which implies elevated permissions, but says nothing about what the detection actually inspects or how it reports a positive detection.

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 content is short and front-loaded, with the substantive clause ('Collect integrity checks and other heuristics') placed early. It wastes one line restating the title, and the API metadata tail ('Immich operation: GET ... · tag: Maintenance') is scaffolding rather than agent-facing meaning.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description carries the burden of explaining what 'detecting a prior install' returns or how the integrity heuristics are surfaced, and it does not. It is adequate for invocation but leaves the agent uncertain about the result shape and the admin-auth requirement beyond the tag.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4; there are no argument semantics for the description to clarify. The description correctly does not invent parameters or filtering options.

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 names a specific verb+resource ('Detect existing install') and adds substance with 'Collect integrity checks and other heuristics about local data', including the underlying endpoint. However, the first sentence merely restates the title, and it doesn't differentiate itself from the many other read/maintenance siblings in the namespace.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given; the agent cannot tell from the text whether this should be invoked before a migration, after a restore, or as part of routine maintenance. The 'Maintenance (admin)' tag hints at context but names no alternatives or prerequisites.

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