connection_health

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It explains key fields and their implications (e.g., session_id changes invalidate download IDs, p2p_reachable false indicates likely download failures) and provides actionable advice for the agent.

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 well-structured and front-loaded, starting with the main verb and purpose. The bullet list of key fields is concise and every sentence provides essential information, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 there is no output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return fields and their meanings. It also covers edge cases and what actions the agent should take based on the values, making the tool's behavior complete and actionable.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description adds useful semantics about the output fields, but there are no parameters to clarify, so it cannot exceed the baseline.

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 the MCP's Soulseek connection health, with a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('Soulseek connection health'). It is distinct from sibling tools like search or download, as no other tool in the context covers connection health.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Call this at the start of every session and after any suspected restart.' This provides clear context for when to use it, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, which would warrant a 5.

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