daily_brief

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It details checks performed, syslog patterns, default behavior, output tiers, and return format. No mention of auth, rate limits, or side effects, but as a read-only health check this is acceptable.

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?

Well-structured with sections, defaults, examples, and output tiers. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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 5 params, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description covers intended behavior, defaults, output format, and example use of tags. Missing descriptions for max_workers and config_path; output schema exists but not provided.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains since_hours (default and example) and tags (usage hint), but hostnames, max_workers, and config_path are not described. Partial coverage.

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?

Description clearly states it runs a morning health check across multiple devices in parallel, listing specific checks and syslog patterns. It is distinct from sibling tools like check_reachability or get_config.

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?

Provides default values and hints for tags and since_hours, but does not explicitly compare to alternative tools or state when to prefer this over siblings. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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