files_health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions checking and fixing drift but does not clarify if the tool is read-only or modifies data, what 'drift' entails, or any side effects of rebuild. Safety information is missing.

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 very concise with a single sentence. It front-loads the main purpose ('DB integrity + FTS5 sync check') and adds a critical usage note. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity, but the structure is clean.

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 annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the tool returns, the meaning of 'drift', when to run the tool, or how to interpret results. The 'database' parameter is left undocumented, making the agent guess.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It only partially describes 'rebuild' as fixing drift, but completely ignores the 'database' parameter, its purpose, and valid values. This leaves agents with insufficient understanding.

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 states a specific verb-resource pair: 'DB integrity + FTS5 sync check', which clearly identifies the tool's function as a health check. It distinguishes from sibling tools like files_search or files_index by focusing on integrity and sync, not retrieval or indexing.

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 provides a usage hint for the rebuild parameter ('Set rebuild=True to fix drift'), but it does not give guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like files_get or files_search. No when-not or trade-offs are mentioned.

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