healthwatch

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses that the tool is read-only, structurally incapable of transmit/write, and details the schedule, monitoring metrics, and notification behavior. This is comprehensive transparency.

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 well-structured with a brief overview followed by a bulleted list of actions. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value, and it's front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 complexity (including a scheduled job, multiple actions, and output), the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and parameters comprehensively. The presence of an output schema further reduces burden.

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?

Despite the input schema having 0% description coverage and no enums, the description exhaustively documents the 'action' parameter, including explanation of each value (status, on, off, run) and their default behavior.

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 manages a scheduled read-only health watch for the Flipper, including what it monitors and the actions available. It distinguishes itself from siblings by its specific function as an on/off switch for a monitoring job, which is unique among the sibling tools.

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 explicitly lists the four actions (status, on, off, run) and explains what each does. It provides guidance on when to use each, though it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives.

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