system_diagnostics

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only mentions 'diagnostics' without stating whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or has side effects. No mention of authentication requirements, rate limits, or data handling.

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 concise, using two sentences to convey purpose and a pointer to more details. However, it could be better structured by grouping related information (e.g., separating purpose from parameter guidance).

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 tool with 13 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain return values, parameter usage, or any constraints, making it nearly impossible for an AI agent to invoke correctly without additional context.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the 13 parameters. Keywords like environment_variables are listed but not linked to the input schema, leaving the AI agent with no understanding of how to set parameters like action, format_output, or search_term.

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 this tool is for unified system diagnostics, combining configuration analysis, auto-discovery debugging, and log analysis. It lists key actions and points to get_capabilities for a complete list, but doesn't specify the output format or what the tool returns, preventing a perfect score.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like business_analytics_management or slack_management. The only hint is 'Use get_capabilities() for complete action list,' but no context on prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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