Meta MCP Health Check

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by specifying what is checked (token status, cached tokens, API connectivity) and the return values. However, it does not disclose potential network calls or rate limiting, which is acceptable given the simpler nature of the tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and includes a succinct list of return values. No extraneous information.

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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool does and returns. Minor gap: it could mention that this tool is suitable for pre-checking server status before other operations, but it is not critical.

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% for the single parameter, with description in the schema. The tool description does not add any information about the parameter beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Checks the health of the Meta MCP server', listing specific aspects like token status, cached tokens, and API connectivity. This is specific and distinct from sibling tools, which are primarily CRUD or utility operations.

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 implies diagnostic use (health check) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. Since no sibling tool provides similar functionality, the context is clear, but exclusions or prerequisites are missing.

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