health_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions listing a tenant and error meanings, but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, has no side effects, or what exactly happens on success (which tenant is listed). The behavioral disclosure is adequate but incomplete.

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 three sentences, each serving a purpose: stating the action, interpreting failure modes, and advising usage. It is front-loaded with the core functionality and highly efficient with 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 the tool's low complexity (1 optional param, output schema exists), the description should cover what the tool returns on success and how the parameter is used. It explains error handling but omits details about the success response (e.g., what tenant info is returned) and the role of facility_id. This leaves the agent underinformed.

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?

The input schema has one parameter 'facility_id' with no description (0% coverage). The tool description does not explain the parameter's role in the health check, nor how it relates to 'listing one tenant.' This is a significant gap, leaving the agent to guess the parameter's purpose.

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: 'Verify credentials work by listing one tenant.' This is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_tenant' and 'list_tenants' by focusing on credential verification rather than data retrieval.

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 tells when to use the tool: 'Use this whenever other tools start returning auth errors.' It also explains how to interpret results (401 vs 403 errors), providing clear guidance on distinguishing credential issues from authorization scoping problems.

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