list_endpoint_healthchecks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It indicates a read-only listing operation, but does not mention pagination, scope, response format, or any other behavioral details.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. It is appropriately concise, though the 'for diagnostics' clause is somewhat vague and could be more informative.

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?

For a simple one-parameter list tool, the description is minimally acceptable but leaves gaps: it does not clarify what an endpoint healthcheck is, how results are paginated, or how this differs from 'list_healthchecks'. No output schema exists to fill those 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%; the only parameter, account_id, is already described as 'The account ID'. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('endpoint healthchecks') and adds a purpose ('for diagnostics'). However, it does not differentiate from the similar sibling 'list_healthchecks' or clarify the relationship to 'get_endpoint_healthcheck'.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_healthchecks' or 'get_endpoint_healthcheck'. The phrase 'for diagnostics' hints at context but does not establish selection criteria or exclusions.

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