pyp6xer_schedule_health_check

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. Description adds value by explaining the composite nature and narrative summary, but no new side effects disclosed. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with main purpose and secondary details. 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?

Given output schema exists and annotations are rich, description adequately covers purpose and composition. Slight gap in usage guidance but otherwise complete for a read-only analytical tool.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what schema already provides, so baseline 3.

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?

Clearly states it generates a composite schedule health score with narrative summary, listing specific components (float distribution, critical path density, etc.) and a 0-100 scale. Distinguishes from sibling tools like pyp6xer_float_analysis or pyp6xer_schedule_quality by focusing on a single aggregate metric.

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?

Implied usage for quick overview of schedule health, but no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. other analysis tools (e.g., for detailed component analysis). Lacks when-not or alternative suggestions.

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