Get TempDB Health

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description still adds substantive context: it names the top-10-session limit and discloses the specific conditions it flags (too few data files, unequal sizes, percent autogrowth), which tells the agent what constitutes a finding rather than just a raw dump.

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?

A single dense sentence organized as scope → categories → flagged conditions, with the resource named first. Every clause carries information; there is no filler or repetition of the title.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must describe what comes back — and it does, listing file layout, space-use breakdown, top sessions, and the flagged anomalies. For a zero-parameter read-only diagnostic with full annotation coverage, nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to document and the baseline is 4. The description correctly introduces no parameter-related claims, leaving no gap.

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?

Names a specific resource (TempDB health) and enumerates exactly what it inspects: file layout (count, equal sizes, autogrowth), space use (user/internal objects, version store, free space), and top 10 tempdb sessions. TempDB is a unique resource across the sibling list, so it is readily distinguishable from mssql_autogrowth_issues, mssql_disk_io_latency, and mssql_storage_capacity.

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?

Usage is implied — an agent can infer this is the tempdb-specific diagnostic to run when investigating tempdb contention or file layout. However, the description never states when to choose it over the overlapping sibling mssql_autogrowth_issues, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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