diagnostics

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses that it reports resolved N3FJP_HOST/PORT, Python version, hostname, and network interfaces, and importantly states it does not connect to N3FJP. This adds significant behavioral context beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by specifics and usage context. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 no parameters, no output schema, but a clear readOnlyHint, the description fully explains the tool's behavior and output. It tells what the tool reports, what it does not do, and provides a use case. Complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description carries the full burden. It describes exactly what the tool reports, which adds all necessary meaning beyond the empty input schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description exceeds expectations.

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 performs host and network diagnostics for troubleshooting connectivity. It explicitly differentiates from the sibling n3fjp_call by stating it does NOT connect to N3FJP, and the verb 'diagnostics' is specific.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool (troubleshooting connectivity) and what it does not do (connect to N3FJP). However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use it, though the context is sufficient.

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