handoff_doctor

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

With no annotations, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states what it checks ('health-check', 'scan for secrets') but does not disclose whether it is read-only, whether it modifies files, what it returns, or any side effects. For a diagnostic tool, this is insufficient transparency.

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 a single, short sentence that effectively communicates the core function. It is front-loaded and contains no filler words; every word contributes to understanding.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional param, no output schema), and the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks information about expected output/return value, side effects, or what a 'health-check' entails beyond secret scanning. For a low-complexity tool this is borderline adequate.

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?

There is one parameter, 'root', with 0% schema description coverage. The description never mentions 'root', so the agent has no guidance on what to pass or what the default behavior is. The description should have explained that 'root' likely sets the base directory for the scan.

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's function: health-check .handoff/ and scan LATEST.md for secrets. This is a specific verb-resource pair ('health-check' and 'scan') that distinguishes it from siblings like handoff_init or handoff_save, which have different purposes.

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: one would run this to check health/secret leakage of handoff files. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over other tools, and no mention of alternatives or exclusions. The sibling context shows different functions, but the description itself doesn't say 'use when...'.

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