db_mongodb_health

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It indicates safety ([SAFE]) and a read-only check, but does not disclose additional behaviors such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens on connection failure. The [SAFE] prefix adds some transparency but lacks depth.

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 extremely concise—one line with a clear structure: [SAFE] prefix, action (check), target (MongoDB health), and what is included. Every word earns its place with no wasted language.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more detail about the returned data or metrics for a health check. While it lists what is checked, it lacks specifics on output format or interpretation, making it only moderately complete for agent decision-making.

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 and 100% schema coverage (empty schema). The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds value by specifying what is checked (stats, server status, connections). Baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description meets it without needing extra detail.

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 checks MongoDB health, including specific aspects like stats, server status, and connections. It distinguishes from sibling tools like db_mysql_health by specifying MongoDB, and the [SAFE] prefix indicates a read-only operation.

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 implies usage for checking MongoDB health but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are mentioned despite many sibling health tools, leaving the agent to infer context.

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